NOTES 


ON    THE 


HISTORY  OF  SLAVERY 


IN 


MASSACHUSE  TTS 


BY 


GEORGE   H.  MOORE 

LIBRARIAN    OF    THE    NEW-YORK    HISTORICAL    SOCIETY    AND    CORRESPONDING 
MEMBER    OF    THE    MASSACHUSETTS    HISTORICAL    SOCIETY 


iis  nescit,  primam  esse  historiae  legem,  ne  quid  falsi 
dicere  audeat?  deinde  ne  quid  veri  non  audeat? 

rT^v    —  Cic.  de  Orat.t  n.,  15. 
tf'  OF  THE     '      ^L 

I    UNIVERSITY   \ 

OF 


NEW-YORK 
D.  APPLETON  &  CO.  ^  &  445  BROADWAY 

MDCCCLXVI 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congrefs,  in  the  year  1866,  by 

GEORGE  H.  MOORE, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  Diftridt  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the 
Southern  Diftridl  of  New  York. 


Stereotyped  by  JOHN  F.  TROW  &  Co.,  50  Greene  Street,  New  York. 


CONTENTS. 


I.  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  SLAVERY  IN  MASSACHUSETTS. 

PURITAN  THEORY  AND  PRACTICE  OF  SLAVERY.  .  I — io 

II.  THE  LAW  OF  SLAVERY  IN  MASSACHUSETTS.  ITS 
ESTABLISHMENT  AND  MODIFICATION.  SLAVERY 
HEREDITARY  IN  MASSACHUSETTS.  RESOLVE  IN 
1646,  TO  RETURN  STOLEN  NEGROES  TO  AFRICA, 
NOT  AN  ACT  HOSTILE  TO  SLAVERY.  .  .  IO 30 

III.  SLAVERY  OF  INDIANS  IN  MASSACHUSETTS.     AT 

TEMPT  TO  SELL  CHILDREN  OF  QUAKERS.      .         .         30 — 48 

IV.  STATISTICS  OF  SLAVE-POPULATION.     LEGISLATION 

CONCERNING     SLAVES     AND     SLAVERY.       TAXA 
TION  OF  SLAVE-PROPERTY.  THE  SLAVE-TRADE.  48 — 72 
V.  EARLIEST   ANTI-SLAVERY  MOVEMENTS   IN   AME 
RICA,  IN    RHODE  ISLAND  AND  PENNSYLVANIA. 
CHIEF-JUSTICE    SEWALL.        CHARACTER    AND 
CONDITIONS  OF  SLAVERY  IN    MASSACHUSETTS. 
JAMES  OTIS'S  PROTEST  AGAINST  NEGRO-SLAV 
ERY.      JOHN  ADAMS  SHUDDERS  AT  HIS  DOC 
TRINES.                   .         .                   ...       72—111 

VI.  "  THE  FREEDOM  SUITS."     SLAVERY  CHALLENGED. 
MOVEMENTS   IN   THE   LEGISLATURE   BETWEEN 
1767  AND  1775.  .         .         .     in — ^7 

VII.  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PRIZE  IN  NEGROES.  ACTION 
OF  MASSACHUSETTS  IN  1776.  NATIONAL 
LEGISLATION  ON  THE  SUBJECT.  HISTORY  OF 
THE  DOCTRINE.  SOUTH  CAROLINA  SLAVES 
CAPTURED  BY  THE  BRITISH,  AND  RECAPTURED 
BY  MASSACHUSETTS  VESSELS  OF  WAR.'  LEGIS- 


102116 


IV 


Contents. 


LATIVE  AND  JUDICIAL    PROCEEDINGS  OF  MASSA 
CHUSETTS.         ...... 

VIII.  PROGRESS    OF    PUBLIC    OPINION    ON  SLAVERY  IN 
MASSACHUSETTS     DURING    THE    REVOLUTION. 
ATTEMPT   TO    ABOLISH    SLAVERY    IN     1777. 
SUBJECT  REFERRED  TO  THE  CONTINENTAL  CON 
GRESS.     THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  1778.     CON 
TROVERSY  ON  NEGRO  EQUALITY.     STATUS  o/ 
FREE  NEGROES.       ..... 

IX.  THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  1780.  ALLEGED  ABOLI 
TION  OF  SLAVERY.  THE  QUESTION  EXAMINED. 
JUDICIAL  LEGISLATION  IN  1781-83.  THE 
JENNISON  SLAVE-CASES.  APPEAL  OF  SLAVE 
OWNERS  TO  THE  LEGISLATURE. 
X.  ABOLITION  OF  THE  SLAVE-TRADE.  LEGISLATION 
AGAINST  NEGROES.  EXPULSION  OF  NEGROES 
FROM  THE  STATE.  CONCLUSION. 

APPENDIX. 

A.  THE  MILITARY  EMPLOYMENT    OF   NEGROES   IN 

MASSACHUSETTS.     ..... 

B.  ADDITIONAL  NOTES,  ETC. 

C.  JUDGE  SAFFIN'S  REPLY  TO  JUDGE  SEWALL,  1701. 


148 — 176 


176—200 


200 — 223 


224 — 242 


243—246 
246 — 250 
251—256 


NOTES  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF 
SLAVERY   IN    MASSACHUSETTS. 


I. 

E  find  the  earlieft  records  of  the  hiftory 
of  flavery  in  Maflachufetts  at  the  period 
of  the  Pequod  War — a  few  years  after  the 
Puritan  fettlement  of  the  colony.  Prior 
to  that  time  an  occafional  offender  againft  the  laws  was 
puniftied  by  being  fold  into  flavery  or  adjudged  to  fer- 
vitude;  but  the  inftitution  firft  appears  clearly  and  di£- 
tinctly  in  the  enflaving  of  Indians  captured  in  war.  We 
may  hereafter  add  a  iketch  of  the  theories  which  were 
held  to  juftify  the  bondage  of  the  heathen,  but  at  pref- 
ent  limit  ourfelves  to  the  collection  of  facts  to  illuftrate 
our  general  fubjecl.  And  at  the  outfet  we  defire  to  fay 
that  in  this  hiftory  there  is  nothing  to  comfort  pro- 
flavery  men  anywhere.  The  ftains  which  flavery  hasj 
left  on  the  proud  efcutcheon  even  of  Maflachufetts,] 
are  quite  as  fignificant  of  its  hideous  character  as  the\ 


2  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 

fatanic  defiance  of  God  and  Humanity  which  accom 
panied  the  laying  of  the  corner-flone  of  the  Slave 
holders'  Confederacy. 

The  ftory  of  the  extermination  of  the  Pequods  is 
well  known*  It  was  that  warlike  tribe  who,  in  the 
early  months  of  "that  fatal  year,"  1637,  were  re 
ported  by  Governor  Winflow  to  Winthrop  as  follows  : 

<c  The  Pecoats  follow  their  fifhing  &  planting  as 
if  they  had  no  enemies.  Their  women  of  efteem  & 
children  are  gone  to  Long  Ifland  with  a  ftrong  gard 
at  Pecoat.  They  profefle  there  you  mail  finde  them, 
and  as  they  were  there  borne  &  bred,  there  their 
bones  mall  be  buried,  &  rott  in  defpight  of  the 
Englifh.  But  if  the  Lord  be  on  our  fide,  their 
braggs  will  soon  fall."  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  iv.,  vL,  164. 

The  extracts  which  follow  explain  themfelves  and 
hardly  require  comment. 

Roger  Williams,  writing  from  Providence  [in  June, 
1637]  to  John  Winthrop,  fays:  fc  I  underftand  it 
would  be  very  gratefvll  to  our  neighbours  that  fuch 
Pequts  as  fall  to  them  be  not  enflaved,  like  thofe 
which  are  taken  in  warr ;  but  (as  they  fay  is  their 
generall  cuftome)  be  vfed  kindly,  haue  howfes  & 
goods  &  fields  given  them :  becaufe  they  voluntarily 
choofe  to  come  in  to  them,  &  if  not  receaved  will 
[go]  to  the  enemie  or  turne  wild  I  rim  themfelues  : 
but  of  this  more  as  I  mall  vnderftand.  .  .  ."  M.  H. 
S.  Coll.,  iv.,  vi.,  195. 

Again  [probably  in  July,  1637]  :  fc  It  having 
againe  pleafed  the  Moft  High  to  put  into  your  hands 
another  miferable  droue  of  Adams  degenerate  feede, 
&  our  brethren  by  nature,  I  am  bold  (if  I  may  not 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  3 

offend  in  it)  to  requeft  the  keeping  &  bringing  vp  of 
one  of  the  children.  I  haue  fixed  mine  eye  on  this 
little  one  with  the  red  about  his  neck,  but  I  will  not 
be  peremptory  in  my  choice,  but  will  reft  in  your 
loving  pleafure  for  him  or  any,"  &c.  M.  H.  S.  Coll., 
iv.,  vi.,  195-6. 

Again  [probably  i8th  September,  1637]:  "Sir, 
concerning  captiues  (pardon  my  wonted  boldnefs)  the 
Scripture  is  full  of  mysterie  &  the  Old  Teftament 
of  types. 

"  If  they  have  deserued  death  'tis  sinn  to  spare  : 

"If  they  haue  not  deserued  death  then  what 
punimments  ?  Whether  perpetuall  flaverie. 

"  I  doubt  not  but  the  enemie  may  lawfully  be 
weaknd  &  despoild  of  all  comfort  of  wife  &  children 
&c.,  but  I  befeech  you  well  weigh  it  after  a  due  time 
of  trayning  vp  to  labour  &  reftraint,  they  ought  not 
to  be  fet  free :  yet  so  as  without  danger  of  adioyning 
to  the  enemie."  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  iv.,  vi.,  214. 

Later  in  the  fame  year  [Nov.  1637]  Roger  Wil 
liams,  who  had  promifed  certain  fugitive  flaves  to  in 
tercede  for  them,  "  to  write  that  they  might  be  vfed 
kindly" — fulfilled  his  promife  in  a  letter  to  Winthrop, 
in  which,  after  ftating  their  complaints  of  ill  usage, 
&c.,  he  adds : 

"  My  humble  defire  is  that  all  that  haue  thefe 
poor  wretches  might  be  exhorted  as  to  walke  wifely 
&  iuftly  towards  them,  so  to  make  mercy  eminent, 
for  in  that  attribute  the  Father  of  mercy  moft  mines 
to  Adams  miserable  ofspring."  M.  H.  S.  Co!!.y  iv., 
vi.,  218,  219. 

Hugh  Peter  writes  to  John  Winthrop  from  Salem 


4  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

(in  1637)  : .  "  Mr.  Endecot  and  my  felfe  falute  you  in 
the  Lord  Jefus,  etc.  Wee  haue  heard  of  a  diuidence  of 
women  and  children  in  the  bay  and  would  bee  glad  of  a 
mare,  viz.  :  a  young  woman  or  girle  and  a  boy  if  you 
thinke  good.  /  wrote  to  you  for  fome  boyes  for  Ber 
mudas,  which  I  thinke  is  conjiderable"  M. U.S. Coll.,  iv., 

vi.,  95- 

In  this  application  of  Hugh  Peter  we  have  a 
glimpse  of  the  beginning  of  the  Colonial  Slave-Trade. 
He  wanted  "  fome  boyes  for  the  Bermudas,"  which 
he  thought  was  "  confiderable." 

It  would  feem  to  indicate  that  this  difpofition  of 
captive  Indian  boys  was  in  accordance  with  custom 
and  previous  practice  of  the  authorities.  At  any  rate, 
it  is  certain  that  in  the  Pequod  War  they  took  many 
prifoners.  Some  of  thefe,  who  had  been  "difposed 
of  to  particular  perfons  in  the  country,"  Winthrop,  i., 
232,  ran  away,  and  being  brought  in  again  were 
"branded  on  the  fhoulder,"  ib.  In  July,  1637, 
Winthrop  fays,  "We  had  now  flain  and  taken,  in 
all,  about  feven  hundred.  We  fent  fifteen  of  the  boys 
and  two  women  to  Bermuda,  by  Mr.  Peirce  ;  but  he, 
miffing  it,  carried  them  to  Providence  Ifle,"  Win 
throp,  i.,  234.  The  learned  editor  of  Winthrop's 
Journal,  referring  to  the  fact  that  this  proceeding  in 
that  day  was  probably  juftified  by  reference  to  the 
practice  or  inftitution  of  the  Jews,  very  quaintly  ob- 
ferves,  cc  Yet  that  cruel  people  never  fent  prifoners  fo 
far."  Ib.,  note. 

Governor  Winthrop,  writing  to  Governor  Brad 
ford  of  Plymouth,  -28th  July,  1637,  an  account  of 
their  fuccefs  againft  the  Pequods — "  ye  Lords  greate 


Slavery  in  Maffachusetts.  5 

mercies  towards  us,  in  our  prevailing  againft  his  & 
our  enimies" — says  : 

"  The  prifoners  were  devided,  fome  to  thofe  of 
ye  river  [the  Connecticut  Colony]  and  the  reft  to  us. 
Of  thefe  we  fend  the  male  children  to  Bermuda,  by 
Mr.  William  Peirce,  &  ye  women  &  maid  children 
are  difpofed  aboute  in  ye  tounes.  Ther  have  now 
been  flaine  and  taken,  in  all,  aboute  700."  M.  H.  S.  Coll., 
iv.,  iii.,  360.  Compare  the  order  for  "  difpofing  of 
ye  Indian  fquaws,"  in  Mass.  Records,  i.,  201. 

Bradford's  note  to  the  letter  quoted  above,  fays 
of  their  being  fent  to  Bermuda :  "  But  y€y  were  car 
ried  to  f  Weft  Indeas." 

Hubbard,  the  contemporary  hiftorian  of  the  Indian 
Wars,  fays  of  thefe  captives,  "  Of  thofe  who  wer£  not 
fo  defperate  or  fullen  to  fell  their  lives  for  nothing, 
but  yielded  in  time,  the  male  Children  were  fent  to  the 
Bermudas,  of  the  females  fome  were  diftributed  to  the 
Englim  Towns  ;  fome  were  difpofed  of  among  the 
other  Indians,  to  whom  they  were  deadly  enemies,  as 
well  as  to  ourfelves."  Narrative,  1677,  p.  130. 

A  fubfequent  entry  in  Winthrop's  Journal  gives 
us  another  glimpfe  of  the  fubjecl,  Feb.  26,  1638. 

"  Mr.  Peirce,  in  the  Salem  ftiip,  the  Defire,  re 
turned  from  the  Weft  Indies  after  feven  months.  He 
had  been  at  Providence,  and  brought  fome  cotton, 
and  tobacco,  and  negroes,  etc.,  from  thence,  and  fait 
from  Tertugos  ;"  Winthrop,  L,  254.  He  adds  to  this 
account  that  "  Dry  fiih  and  ftrong  liquors  are  the 
only  commodities  for  thofe  parts.  He  met  there 
two  men-of-war,  fet  forth  by  the  lords,  etc.,  of  Provi 
dence  with  letters  of  mart,  who  had  taken  divers 


6  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

prizes  from  the  Spaniard  and  many  negroes."  Long 
afterwards  Dr.  Belknap  faid  of  the  flave-trade,  that  the 
rum  diftilled  in  MafTachufetts  was  "  the  mainfpring 
of  this  traffick."  M.  H.  S.  Coll,  i.,  iv.,  197. 

JolTelyn  fays,  that  cc  they  sent  the  male  children 
of  the  Pequets  to  the  Bermudus."  258.  M.H.S. 
Coll.,  iv.,  iii.,  36O.1 

This  lingle  cargo  of  women  and  children  was 
probably  not  the  only  one  fent,  for  the  Company  of 
Providence  Ifland,  in  replying  from  London  in  1638, 
July  3,  to  letters  from  the  authorities  in  the  ifland, 
direct  fpecial  care  to  be  taken  of  the  cc  Cannibal  ne 
groes  brought  from  New  England."  Sain/fury's 
Calendar >  1574— 1660,  2y8.2 

And  in  1639,  wnen  tne  Company  feared  that  the 
number  of  the  negroes  might  become  too  great  to  be 
managed,  the  authorities  thought  they  might  be  fold 
and  fent  to  New  England  or  Virginia.  7A,  296. 

The  fhip  "  Defire"  was  a  veflel  of  one  hundred 
and  twenty  tons,  built  at  Marblehead  in  1636,  one 
of  the  earliefl  built  in  the  Colony.  Winthropj  i.,  193. 

In   the  Pequot  War,  fome   of  the  Narraganfetts 


1  Governor  Winthrop  in  his  will  (1639-41)  left  to  his  fon  Adam  his 
ifland  called  the  Governor's  Garden,  adding,  "  I  give  him  alfo  my  Indians 
there  and  my  boat  and  fuch  houfehold  as  is  there." — Winthrop's  Journal^ 
ii.,  360.,  App. 

2  "  We  would  have  the  Cannibal  negroes  brought  from  New  England 
inquired  after,  whofe  they  are,  and  fpeciall  care  taken  of  them."     P.  R.  O. 
Col.  Ent.  Bk.,  Vol.  iv.,  p.  1 24.     In  the  preface  to  the  Colonial  Calendar,  p. 
xxv.,  Mr.  Sainfbury  explains  why  no  anfwers  to  the  Company's  letters  are 
in  the  State  Paper  Office.     The  Bahama  Iflands  were  governed  abfolutely 
by  a   Company  in  London,  and  unfortunately  the  letters  received  by  the 
Company  have  not  been  preferred,  or  if  fo,  it  is  not  known  where  they 
now  are.     MS.  Letter. 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  7 

joined  the  Englifh  in  its  profecution,  and  received  a 
part  of  the  prifoners  as  flaves,  for  their  fervices. 
Miantunnomoh  received  eighty,  Ninigret  was  to  have 
twenty.  Mather  fays  of  the  principal  engagement, 
"  the  captives  that  were  taken  were  about  one  hundred 
and  eighty,  which  were  divided  between  the  two 
Colonyes,  and  they  intended  to  keep  them  as  ferv- 
ants,  but  they  could  not  endure  the  Yoke,  for  few  of 
them  continued  any  confiderable  time  with  their  mas 
ters."  Drake,  122,  146.  Mather  s  Relation,  quoted  by 
Drake,  39.  See  alfo  Hartford  Treaty,  Sept.  21,  1638, 
in  Drake,  125.  Drake's  Mather,  150,  151. 

Captain  Stoughton,  who  aflifted  in  the  work  of 
exterminating  the  Pequots,  after  his  arrival  in  the 
enemy's  country,  wrote  to  the  Governor  of  Maflachu- 
fetts  [Winthrop]  as  follows  :  "  By  this  pinnace,  you 
fhall  receive  forty-eight  or  fifty  women  and  children. 
.  .  .  Concerning  which,  there  is  one,  I  formerly  men 
tioned,  that  is  the  faireft  and  largest  that  I  faw  amongft 
them,  to  whom  I  have  given  a  coate  to  cloathe  her. 
It  is  my  defire  to  have  her  for  a  fervant,  if  it  may 
ftand  with  your  good  liking,  elfe  not.  There  is  a 
little  fquaw  that  Steward  Culacut  desireth,  to  whom 
he  hath  given  a  coate.  Lieut.  Davenport  alfo  defireth 
one,  to  wit,  a  fmall  one,  that  hath  three  ftrokes  upon 
her  ftomach,  thus: — 1||  +.  He  defireth  her,  if  it 
will  ftand  with  your  liking.  Sofomon,  the  Indian, 
defireth  a  young  little  fquaw,  which  I  know  not."  MS. 
Letter  in  Mafs.  Archives,  quoted  by  Drake,  171. 

An  early  traveller  in  New  England  has  preferved 
for  us  the  record  of  one  of  the  earlieft,  if  not,  indeed, 
the  very  firft  attempt  at  breeding  of  flaves  in  Amer- 


8  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

ica.  The  following  paflage  from  JofTelyn's  Account 
of  Two  Voyages  to  New  England,  published  at  Lon 
don  in  1664,  will  explain  itfelf: 

"The  Second  of  Qttober^  [1639]  a^out  9  of  the 
clock  in  the  morning  Mr.  Mavericks  Negro  woman 
came  to  my  chamber  window,  and  in  her  own  Coun- 
trey  language  and  tune  fang  very  loud  and  fhrill,  go 
ing  out  to  her,  me  ufed  a  great  deal  of  refpect  to 
wards  me,  and  willingly  would  have  exprefTed  her 
grief  in  Englijh ;  but  I  apprehended  it  by  her  coun 
tenance  and  deportment,  whereupon  I  repaired  to 
my  hoft,  to  learn  of  him  the  caufe,  and  refolved  to 
intreat  him  in  her  behalf,  for  that  I  underftood  be 
fore,  that  me  had  been  a  Queen  in  her  own  Coun- 
trey,  and  obferved  a  very  humble  and  dutiful  garb 
ufed  towards  her  by  another  Negro  who  was  her  maid, 
Mr.  Maverick  was  defirous  to  have  a  breed  of  Ne 
groes,  and  therefore  feeing  me  would  not  yield  by 
perfuafions  to  company  with  a  Negro  young  man  he 
had  in  his  houfe  ;  he  commanded  him  wilPd  me  nill'd 
me  to  go  to  bed  to  her,  which  was  no  fooner  done 
but  me  kickt  him  out  again,  this  me  took  in  high 
difdain  beyond  her  flavery,  and  this  was  the  caufe  of 
her  grief."  Jo/elyn,  28. 

Joflelyn  vifited  New  England  twice,  and  fpent 
about  ten  years  in  this  country,  from  1638—39  and 
1663  to  1671.  In  fpeaking  of  the  people  of  Bofton 
he  mentions  that  the  people  "  are  well  accommodated 
with  fervants  ....  of  thefe  fome  are  Englifh,  others 
Negroes."  Ibid.,  182. 

Mr.  Palfrey  fays:  "Before  Winthrop's  arrival 
there  were  two  negro  flaves  in  Maflachufetts,  held 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  9 

by  Mr.  Maverickj  on  Noddle's  Ifland."  Hiftory  of 
New  England,  II.,  30,  note.  If  there  is  any  evidence 
to  fuftain  this  ftatement,  it  is  certainly  not  in  the 
authority  to  which  he  refers.  On  the  contrary,  the 
inference  is  irrefiftible  from  all  the  authorities  to 
gether,  that  the  negroes  of  Mr.  Maverick  were  a  por 
tion  of  thofe  imported  in  the  firft  colonial  flave-fhip, 
the  Defire,  of  whofe  voyage  we  have  given  the  hiftory. 
It  is  not  to  be  fuppofed  that  Mr.  Maverick  had 
waited  ten  years  before  taking  the  fteps  towards  im 
proving  his  ftock  of  negroes,  which  are  referred  to 
by  JofTelyn.  Ten  years'  flavery  on  Noddle's  Ifland 
would  have  made  the  negro-queen  more  familiar  with 
the  Englifh  language,  if  not  more  compliant  to  the 
brutal  cuftoms  of  flavery. 

It  will  be  obferved  that  this  firft  entrance  into  the 
flave-trade  was  not  a  private,  individual  fpeculation. 
It  was  the  enterprife  of  the  authorities  of  the  Colony. 
And  on  the  ijth  March,  1639,  it  was  ordered  by  the 
General  Court  ""that  3/  $s  should  be  paid  Leiftenant 
Davenport  for  the  prefent,  for  charge  diflburfed  for 
the  flaves,  which,  when  they  have  earned  it,  hee  is  to 
repay  it  back  againe."  The  marginal  note  is,  c<  Lieft. 
Davenport  to  keep  ye  flaues."  Majs.  Rec.,  i.,  253. 

Emanuel  Downing,  a  lawyer  of  the  Inner  Tem 
ple,  London,  who  married  Lucy  Winthrop,  iifter  of 
the  elder  Winthrop,  came  over  to  New  England  in 
1638.  The  editors  of  the  Winthrop  papers  fay  of 
him,  "  There  were  few  more  active  or  efficient  friends 
of  the  Maflachufetts  Colony  during  its  earlieft  and 
moft  critical  period."  His  fon  was  the  famous  Sir 
George  Downing,  Englifti  ambaflador  at  the  Hague. 


io  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

In  a  letter  to  his  brother-in-law,  "probably  writ 
ten  during  the  fummer  of  1645,"  is  a  moft  luminous 
illustration  of  the  views  of  that  day  and  generation 
on  the  subject  of  human  ilavery.  He  fays  : 

"  A  warr  with  the  Narraganfett  is  verie  confider- 
able  to  this  plantation,  ffor  I  doubt  whither  yt  be  not 
fynne  in  vs,  hauing  power  in  our  hands,  to  fuffer 
them  to  maynteyne  the  worihip  of  the  devill,  which 
their  paw  wawes  often  doe ;  2lie,  if  upon  a  Juft  warre 
the  Lord  mould  deliver  them  into  our  hands,  we 
might  eafily  haue  men,  woemen  and  children  enough 
to  exchange  for  M cores,  which  wilbe  more  gayneful 
pilladge  for  vs  than  wee  conceive,  for  I  doe  not  fee 
how  wee  can  thrive  vntill  wee  gett  into  a  flock  of 
slaves  fufficient  to  doe  all  our  buifmes,  for  our  child 
ren's  children  will  hardly  fee  this  great  Continent 
filled  with  people,  foe  that  our  fervants  will  ftill  defire 
freedom  to  plant  for  them  felues,  and  not  ftay  but  for 
verie  great  wages.  And  I  fuppofe  you  know  verie 
well  how  wee  mall  maynteyne  20  M cores  cheaper  than 
one  Englifhe  fervant. 

"  The  mips  that  mall  bring  Moores  may  come 
home  laden  with  fait  which  may  beare  most  of  the 
chardge,  if  not  all  of  yt.  But  I  marvayle  Conecticott 
mould  any  wayes  hafard  a  warre  without  your  advife, 
which  they  cannot  mayntayne  without  your  helpe." 
M.  H.  S.  Coll,  iv.,  vi.,  65. 


II. 

WE  come  now  to  the  era  of  pofitive  legiflation  on 
the  fubjed  of  human   bondage    in    America.       Mr. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  n 

Hurd,  the  ableft  writer  on  this  fubject,  fays  :  <c  The 
involuntary  fervitude  of  Indians  and  negroes  in  the 
feveral  colonies  originated  under  a  law  not  promulgated 
by  legiflation,  and  refted  upon  prevalent  views  of  uni- 
verfal  jurifprudence,  or  the  law  of  nations ,  fupported 
by  the  exprefs  or  implied  authority  of  the  home  Gov 
ernment/'  Law  of  Freedom  and  Bondage,  §  216,  i., 
225. 

Under  this  fanction  flavery  may  very  properly  be 
faid  to  have  originated  in  all  the  colonies,  but  it  was 
not  long  before  it  made  its  appearance  on  the  ftatute- 
book  in  MafTachufetts.  The  firfl  ftatute  eftablifti- 
ing  flavery  in  America  is  to  be  found  in  the  famous 
CODE  OF  FUNDAMENTALS,  or  BODY  OF  LIBERTIES  OF 
THE  MASSACHUSETTS  COLONY  IN  NEW-ENGLAND — the 
firft  code  of  laws  of  that  colony,  adopted  in  Decem 
ber,  1641.  Thefe  liberties  had  been,  after  a  long 
ftruggle  between  the  magiftrates  and  the  people,  ex- 
traded  from  the  reluctant  grafp  of  the  former. 
"  The  people  had  [1639]  long  defireda  body  of  laws, 
and  thought  their  condition  very  unfafe,  while  fo 
much  power  refted  in  the  difcretion  of  magiftrat.es." 
Winthrop)  i.,  322.  Never  were  the  demands  of  a  free 
people  eluded  by  their  public  fervants  with  more  of 
the  contortions  as  well  as  wifdom  of  the  ferpent. 
Compare  Gray  in  M.  H.  S.,  m.,  viii.,  208. 

The  fcantinefs  of  the  materials  for  the  particular 
hiftory  of  this  renowned  code  is  fuch  as  to  forbid  the 
attempt  to  trace  with  certainty  to  its  origin  the  law 
in  queftion.  It  is,  however,  obvious  that  it  was 
made  to  provide  for  flavery  as  an  exifting,  subftantial 
fact,  if  not  to  reftrain  the  application  of  thofe  higher- 


12  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

law  doctrines,  which  the  magistrates  muft  have  fome- 
times  found  inconvenient  in  adminiftration.  The 
preamble  to  the  Body  of  Liberties  itfelf  might  have 
been  conftrued  into  fome  vague  recognition  of  rights 
in  individual  members  of  fociety  fuperior  to  legiflative 
power — although  it  was  promulgated  by  the  pofTerTors 
of  the  moft  arbitrary  authority  in  the  then  actual 
holders  of  legiflative  and  executive  power.  Compare 
Hurd*s  Law  of  Freedom  and  Bondage,  i.,  198.  Had 
they  only  learned  to  reafon  as  fome  of  the  modern 
writers  of  MafTachufetts  hiftory  have  done  on  this 
fubjecl,  the  poor  Indians  and  Negroes  of  that  day 
might  have  compelled  additional  legiflation  if  they 
could  not  vindicate  their  rights  to  freedom  in  the  gen 
eral  court.  For  the  firft  article  of  the  Declaration  of 
Rights  in  1780,  is  only  a  new  edition  of  cc  the  glitter 
ing  and  founding  generalities  "  which  prefaced  the 
Body  of  Liberties  in  1641.  Under  the  latter,  human 
flavery  exifted  for  nearly  a  century  and  a  half  without 
ferious  challenge,  while  under  the  former  it  is  faid  to 
have  been  abolifhed  by  inference  by  a  public  opinion 
which  ftill  continued  to  tolerate  the  flave-trade. 

But  to  the  law  and  the  testimony.  The  ninety- 
firfl  article  of  the  Body  of  Liberties  appears  as  fol 
lows,  under  the  head  of 

"  Liberties  of  Forreiners  and  Strangers. 

"  91.  There  mail  never  be  any  bond  flaverie,  vil- 
linage  or  captivitie  amongft  us  unles  it  be  lawfull 
captives  taken  in  jufl  warres,  and  fuch  Strangers  as 
willingly  felle  themfelves  or  are  fold  to  us.  And 
thefe  mall  have  all  the  liberties  and  Chriftian  ufages 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  13 

which  the  law  of  God  eftablifhed  in  Ifraell  concerning 
fuch  perfons  doeth  morally  require.  This  exempts 
none  from  fervltude  who  Jfltall  .be  Judged  thereto  by 
Authentic."  M.  H.  S.  Co^iii.^vmy  231, 

Thefe  laws  were  not  printed,  but  were  published 
in  manufcript1  under  the  fuperintendence  of  a  com 
mittee  in  which  Deputy-Governor  Endicott  was  aflb- 
ciated  with  Mr.  Downing  and  Mr.  Hauthorne,  and, 
Governor  Winthrop  fays,  "eftablifhed  for  three  years, 
by  that  experience  to  have  them  fully  amended  and 
eftablifhed  to  be  perpetual."  Majs.  Records  y  i.,  344, 
346.  Winthrop9 s  Journal,  IL,  55.  By  the  ninety- 
eighth  and  laft  fection  of  this  code,  it  was  decreed  as 
follows : 

c<  98.  Laftly  becaufe  our  dutie  and  defire  is  to  do 
nothing  fuddainlie  which  fundamentally  concerne  us, 
we  decree  that  thefe  rites  and  liberties,  mall  be  Aud- 
ably  read  and  deliberately  weighed  at  every  Generall 
Court  that  mall  be  held,  within  three  yeares  next  in- 
fueing,  And  fuch  of  them  as  mall  not  be  altered  or 
repealed  they  mall  ftand  fo  ratified,  That  no  man  mall 
infringe  them  without  due  punimment. 

"  And  if  any  Generall  Court  within  thefe  next 
thre  yeares  mall  faile  or  forget  to  reade  and  confider 
them  as  abovefaid,  The  Governor  and  Deputy  Gov 
ernor  for  the  time  being,  and  every  Affiftant  prefent 
at  fuch  Courts,  mall  forfeite  20  m.  a  man,  and  everie 
Deputie  10  m.  a  man  for  each  neglect,  which  mall  be 


1  There  is  no  reafon  to  doubt  the  authenticity  of  the  ancient  MS. 
which  was  the  foundation  of  the  very  able  and  inftru&ive  paper  of  the  late 
Mr.  Francis  C.  Gray  on  "  The  Early  Laws  of  Ma/achufetts"  as  a  part  of 
which  the  Body  of  Liberties  was  printed  in  1843. 


14  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

paid  out  of  their  proper  eftate,  and  not  by  the  Coun 
try  or  the  Townes  which  choofe  them,  and  whenfo- 
ever  there  mall  arife  any  queftion  'in  any  Court 
amonge  the  Affiftants  and  AfTbciates  thereof  about 
the  explanation  of  thefe  Rites  and  liberties.  The  Gen- 
erall  Court  onely  mall  have  power  to  interprett 
them."  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  in.,  viii.,  236,  237. 

It  is  not  to  be  doubted  that  at  the  following  fef- 
fions  of  the  General  Court,  "  the  lawes  were  read 
over,5'  in  accordance  with  this  decree.  And  before 
the  expiration  of  the  three  years,  committees  were  ap 
pointed  to  revife  the  Body  of  Liberties,  and  orders 
relating  to  it  were  parTed  every  year  afterward  until 
1648,  when  the  laws  were  firft  printed.  Gray  s  Re 
ports,  ix.,  513^ 

Of  this  firft  printed  edition  of  the  laws  it  is  fup- 
pofed  that  no  copy  is  now  in  exiftence.  Ibid.  This 
is  much  to  be  regretted,  as  a  comparifon  might  pof- 
fibly  throw  fome  light  on  the  change  in  the  law  of 
flavery,  which  appears  in  all  the  fubfequent  editions. 
Although  hitherto  entirely  unnoticed,  we  regard  it  as 
highly  important ;  for  it  takes  away  the  foundation 
of  a  grievous  charge  againft  that  God-fearing  and  law- 
abiding  people.  For,  if  cc  no  perfon  was  ever  born 
into  legal  flavery  in  Maflachufetts,"  there  was  a  moft 
mocking  chronic  violation  of  law  in  that  Colony  and 
Province  for  more  than  a  century,  hardly  to  be  recon 
ciled  with  their  hiftqrical  reputation. 

1  In  the  elaborate,  learned,  and  moft  valuable  note  of  Mr.  Gray,  here 
referred  to,  the  reader  will  find  references  to  all  the  original  authorities, 
which  it  is  needlefs  to  repeat  in  this  place.  We  have  been  unable  to  veri 
fy  his  reference  to  Mafs.  Records,  n.,  2,  for  proceedings  of  the  General 
Court  on  the  aoth  May,  1642,  in  the  common  copies  of  that  volume. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  15 

In  the  fecond  printed  edition,  that  of  1660,  the 
law  appears  as  follows,  under  the  title 

'  "  BOND-SLAVERY. 

IT  is  Ordered  by  this  Court  &  Authority  there 
of;  That  there  fhall  never  be  any  bond-flavery/ 
villenage  or  captivity  amongft  us,  unles  it  be  Lawful] 
captives,  taken  in  jufl  warrs,  [or  JucH\  as  \Jhall~\  will 
ingly  fell  themfelves,  or  are  fold  to  us,  and  fuch  fhall 
have  the  liberties,  &  Chriftian  ufuage,  which  the 
Law  of  God  eftablifhed  in  Ifrael,  Concerning  fuch 
perfons,  doth  morally  require,  provided  this  exempts 
none  from  fervitude,  who  mall  be  judged  thereto  by 
Authority.  [1641.]"  Mafs.  Laws,  Ed.  1660,^.5. 

The  words  italicized  in  brackets  appear  among 
the  manufcript  corrections  of  the  copy  which  (former 
ly  the  property  of  Mr.  Secretary  Rawfon,  who  was 
himfelf  apparently  the  Editor  of  the  volume)  is  now 
preferved  in  the  Library  of  the  American  Antiquarian 
Society  at  Worcefter,  in  Maffachufetts.  It  is  plain, 
however,  that  the  printed  text  required  correction, 
and — although  no  better  authority  can  poffibly  be  de 
manded  than  that  of  the  Editor  himfelf — it  is  confirmed 
by  the  subfequent  edition  of  1672,  in  which  the  fame 
error,  having  been  repeated  in  the  text,  is  made  the 
occasion  of  a  correction  in  the  printed  table  of  errata. 
There  is  a  want  of  accuracy  even  in  this  correction  it- 
felf ;  but  the  intention  is  fo  obvious  that  it  cannot  be 
miftaken.  Mafs.  Laws,  Ed.  1672,  pp.  10,  170. 

To  prevent  any  poflible  doubt  which  may  ftill 
linger  in  the  mind  of  any  reader  at  the  end  of  the 
demonflration  through  which  we  ourfelves  firft  arrived 


1 6  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

at  this  refult,  we  will  add  the  following  record — evi 
dence  afterwards  difcovered — which  it  will  puzzle  the 
moil  aftute  critic  to  make  cc  void  and  of  none  effect." 

In  May,  1670,  on  the  laft  day  of  the  month,  a 
committee  was  appointed  by  the  General  Court  <c  to 
pervfe  all  our  lawes  now  in  force,  to  collect  &  drawe 
vp  any  literall  errors  or  mifplacing  of  words  or  fen- 
tences  therein,  or  any  libertjes  infringed,  and  to  make 
a  convenient  table  for  the  ready  finding  of  all  things 
therein,  that  fo  they  may  be  fitted  ffor  the  preffe,  & 
the  fame  to  prefent  to  the  next  feffion  of  this  Court, 
to  be  further  confidered  off  &  approved  by  the  Court." 
Mafs.  Records,  iv.,  ii.,  453. 

At  the  following  feffion  of  the  Court,  the  com 
mittee  prefented  their  report  accordingly,  and  on  the 
1 2th  October,  1670,  the  following  order  was  made  : 

cc  The  Court,  having  pervfed  &  confidered  of 
the  returne  of  the  comittee,  to  whom  the  revejw  of 
the,  lawes  was  referred,  &c.,  by  the  Generall  Court  in 
May  laft,  as  to  the  litterall  erratars,  &c.,  do  order 
that  in  ***** 

cc  Page  5,  Ij  :  3,  tit.  Bondflauery,  read  c  or  fuch  as 
mall  willingly/  &c."  Mafs.  Records,  iv.,  ii.,  467. 

As  the  circumftances  under  which  all  thefe  laws 
and  liberties  were  originally  compofed  and  after  long 
difcuflion,  minute  examination,  and  repeated  revifions, 
finally  fettled  and  eftablifhed,  forbid  the  fuppofition 
that  flavery  came  in  an  unbidden  or  unwelcome  gueft 
— fo  is  it  equally  impoffible  to  admit  that  this  altera 
tion  of  the  fpecial  law  of  flavery  by  the  omiffion  of  so 
important  and  fignificant  a  word  could  have  been  acci 
dental  or  without  motive. 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  17 

If  under  the  original  law  the  children  of  enflaved 
captives  and  ftrangers  might  poflibly  have  claimed 
exemption  from  that  fervitude  to  which  the  recognized 
common  law  of  nations  afligned  them  from  their 
birth ;  this  amendment,  by  finking  out  the  word 
"  ftrangers/'  removed  the  neceffity  for  alienage  or 
foreign  birth  as  a  qualification  for  flavery,  and  took 
off  the  prohibition  againft  the  children  of  flaves  being 
cc  born  into  legal  flavery  in  Maffachufetts." 

It  is  true  there  is  little  probability  that  in  thofe 
days  the  natural  rights  of  thefe  little  heathen,  born  in 
a  Chriftian  land,  would  have  been  much  regarded,  or 
that  the  owners  of  flave  parents  would  have  had  much 
difficulty  in  quieting  the  title  by  having  the.increafe 
of  their  chattels  duly  "judged"  to  fervitude  by 
authoritie,"  in  accordance  with  the  civil  law;  ftill 
there  might  have  been  color  for  the  claim  to  freedom, 
which  this  amendment  effectually  barred.  And  this 
was  in  accordance,  too,  with  the  law  of  Mofes — the 
children  of  flaves  remained  flaves,  being  the  clafs 
defcribed  as  cc  born  in  the  houfe." 

This  Maffachufetts  law  of  flavery  was  not  a  regu 
lation  of  the  ftatus  of  indentured  fervants.  cc  Bond- 
flavery"  was  not  the  name  of  their  fervice,  neither  is 
it  placed  among  the  cc  Liberties  of  Jervants"  but  thofe 
of  "  Forreiners  and  ftrangers"  And  in  all  the  editions 
of  the  laws,  this  diftinction  is  maintained;  "  Bond- 
flavery  "  being  invariably  a  feparate  title.  White  fer 
vants  for  a  term  of  years  would  hardly  be  defignated 
as  ftrangers,1  and  a  careful  ftudy  of  the  whole  fubjed: 

1  John  Cotton,  in  his  letter  to  Cromwell,  July  28,  1651,  fays:  "the 
Scots,  whom  God  delivered   into  your  hands  at  Dunbarre,  and  whereof 

2 


1 8  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

justifies   at  leafl  the  doubt  whether  the  privileges  of 
fervants  belonged  to  flaves  at  all. 

The  law  mufl  be  interpreted  in  the  light  of  con 
temporaneous  fads  of  hiflory.  At  the  time  it  was 
made  (1641),  what  had  its  authors  to  provide  for? 

1.  Indian  flaves  —  their  captives  taken  in  war. 

2.  Negro    Haves  —  their    own     importations     of 

"flrangers"  obtained    by    purchafe    or    ex 
change. 

3.  Criminals  —  condemned  to  flavery  as  a  punifh- 

ment  for  offences. 

In  this  light,  and  only  in  this  light,  is  their  legifla- 
tion  intelligible  and  confiflent.  It  is  very  true  that 
the  code  of  which  this  law  is  a  part  cc  exhibits  through 
out  the  hand  of  the  practifed  lawyer,  familiar  with  the 
principles  and  fecurities  of  Englifh  Liberty  ;"  but 
who  had  ever  heard,  at  that  time,  of  the  "  common- 
law  rights  "  of  Indians  and  negroes,  or  anybody  elfe 
but  Englimmen  ? 

Thus  flood  the  flatute  through  the  whole  colonial 
period,  and  it  was  never  expreffly  repealed.  Bafed  on 
the  Mofaic  code,  it  is  an  abfolute  recognition  of 
flavery  as  a  legitimate  flatus,  and  of  the  right  of  one 
man  to  fell  himfelf  as  well  as  that  of  another  man  to 
buy  him.  It  fanclions  the  flave-trade,  and  the  per 
petual  bondage  of  Indians  and  negroes,  their  children 
and  their  children's  children,  and  entitles  MafTachu- 
fetts  to  precedence  over  any  and  all  the  other  colonies 


fundry  were  fent  hither,  we  have  been  defirous  (as  we  could)  to  make  their 
yoke  eafy.      *  *       They  have  not  been  fold  for  flaves  to  perpetuall 

fervitude,  but  for  6,  or  7  or  8  yearesj  as  we  do  our  owne."     Hutchinforfs 
Coll.y  235.     He  certainly  did  not  mean  "  our  owne  "  Indians  and  negroes. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  19 

in  fimilar  legiflation.  It  anticipates  by  many  years 
anything  of  the  fort  to  be  found  in  the  flatutes  of  Vir 
ginia,  or  Maryland,  or  South  Carolina,  and  nothing 
like  it  is  to  be  found  in  the  contemporary  codes  of 
her  fifler  colonies  in  New  England.  Compare  Hildreth, 
i.,  278. 

Yet  this  very  law  has  been  gravely  cited  in  a 
paper  communicated  to  the  MafTachufetts  Hiftorical 
Society,  and  twice  reprinted  in  its  publications  with 
out  challenge  or  correction,  as  an  evidence  that  "  fo 
far  as  it  felt  free  to  follow  its  own  inclinations,  un 
controlled  by  the  action  of  the  mother  country, 
Maflachufetts  was  hoftile  to  flavery  as  an  inftitution." 
M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  iv.,  iv.,  334.  Proc.,  1855-58,^.  189. 

And  with  the  ftatute  before  them,  it  has  been  per- 
fiftently  aflerted  and  repeated  by  all  forts  of  authori 
ties,  historical  and  legal,  up  to  that  of  the  Chief 
Juftice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  Commonwealth, 
that  "  flavery  to  a  certain  extent  feems  to  have  crept 
in  ;  not  probably  by  force  of  any  law,  for  none  fuch 
is  found  or  known  to  exift."  Commonwealth  vs.  Aves, 
1 8  Pickering,  208.  Shaw,  C.  J. 

The  leading  cafe  in  Maflachufetts  is  that  of  Win- 
chendon  vs.  Hatfield  in  error,  iv  Majs.  Reports,  123. 
It  relates  to  the  fettlement  of  a  negro  pauper  who  had 
been  a  flave  as  early  as  1757,  and  pafled  through  the 
hands  of  nine  feparate  owners  before  1775.  From 
the  ninth  he  abfconded,  and  enlifted  in  the  Mafla 
chufetts  Army  among  the  eight-months'  men,  at  Cam 
bridge,  in  the  beginning  of  the  Revolutionary  War. 
His  term  of  fervice  had  not  expired  when  he  was 
again  fold,  in  July,  1776,  to  another  citizen  of  Mafla- 


2o  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

chufetts,  with  whom  he  lived  about  five  weeks,  when 
he  enlifled  into  the  three-years'  fervice,  and  his  laft 
owner  received  the  whole  of  his  bounty  and  part  of 
his  wages. 

EDOM  LONDON,  for  fuch  was  the  name  of  this 
revolutionary  patriot,  in  1806  was  "poor,"  and  "had 
become  chargeable"  to  the  town  in  which  he  refided. 
That  town  magnanimoufly  ftruggled  through  all  the 
Courts,  from  the  Justices  Court  up  to  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  Commonwealth,  to  fhift  the  refponsibility 
for  the  maintenance  and  fupport  of  the  old  foldier 
from  itfelf  to  one  of  the  numerous  other  towns  in 
which  he  had  fojourned  from  time  to  time  as  the  flave 
of  his  eleven  matters.  The  attempt  was  unfuccefsful ; 
but  it  is  worthy  of  notice,  as  Chief  Juflice  Parfons, 
in  the  decifion  on  the  appeal,  fettled  feveral  very 
important  points  concerning  the  laws  of  flavery  in 
Maffachufetts.  He  said  : 

"  Slavery  was  introduced  into  this  country  [MafTa-  C 
chufetts]  foon  after  its  firft  fettlement,  and  was  tol 
erated  until  the  ratification  of  the  prefent  Conttitution 
[the  Constitution  of  1780].  .  .  .  The  iflue  of  the 
female  flave,  according  to  the  maxim  of  the  Civil 
law,  was  the  property  of  her  matter." 

With  regard  to  this  latter  point,  Chief  Juftice 
Dana,  in  directing  a  jury,  in  1796,  had  ftated  as  the 
unanimous  opinion  of  the  Court,  that  a  negro  born  in 
the  State  before  the  Conftitution  of  1780,  was  born 
free,  although  born  of  a  female  flave. 

Chief  Juftice  Parfons,  however,  candidly  declared 
that  "it  is  very  certain  that  the  general  practice  and 
common  ufage  had  been  oppofed  to  this  opinion." 


Slavery  in  Maffachujctts.  21 

Chief  Juftice  Parker,  in  1816,  cautioufly  confirmed 
this  view  of  the  fubject  by  his  predeceflbr.  Andover 
vs.  Canton,  13  Mafs.  Reports,  551-552.. 

"  The  practice  was  ...  to  confider  fuch  ifTue  as 
flaves,  and  the  property  of  the  mafter  of  the  parents, 
liable  to  be  fold  and  transferred  like  other  chattels, 
and  as  aflets  in  the  hands  of  executors  and  adminiftra- 
tors."  He  adds,  "we  think  there  is  no  doubt  that, 
at  any  period  of  our  hiftory,  the  iflue  of  a  flave  huf- 
band  and  a  free  wife  would  have  been  declared  free."  * 

"His  children,  if  the  ifTue  of  a  marriage  with  a 
flave,  would,  immediately  on  their  birth,  become  the 
property  of  his  mafter,  or  of  the  mafter  of  the  female 
flave." 

Notwithftanding  all  this,  in  Mr.  Sumner's  famous 
fpeech  in  the  Senate,  June  28,  1854,  he  boldly  afferted 
that  "in  all  her  annals,  no  perfon  was  ever  born  a 
flave  on  the  foil  of  Maflachufetts,"  and  "if,  in  point 
of  fact,  the  iflue  of  flaves  was  fometimes  held  in 
bondage,  it  was  never  by  fanction  of  any  ftatute-law 
of  Colony  or  Commonwealth." 

And  recent  writers  of  hiftory  in  Maflachufetts 
have  aflumed  a  flmilar  lofty  and  positive  tone  on  this 
fubject.  Mr.  Palfrey  fays  :  "In  fact,  no  perfon  was 
ever  born  into  legal  flavery  in  Maffachufetts."  Hift. 
N.  E.y  ii.,  30,  note.  Neither  Mr.  Sumner  nor  Mr. 
Palfrey  give  any  authorities  for  their  ftatements  be- 

1  Kendall,  who  travelled  through  the  northern  parts  of  the  United 
States  in  the  years  1807  and  1808,  referring  to  this  fubjeft,  fays  :  "  While 
flavery  was  maintained  in  Maflachufetts,  there  was  a  particular  temptation 
to  negroes  for  taking  Indian  wives,  the  children  of  Indian  women  being 
acknowledged  to  be  free."  Travels,  n.,  179.  See  Hift.  Coll.  E/ex  Infti- 
tute,  Vol.  vii.,  p.  73.  Cafe  ofPriscillay  &c.y  againfl  Simmons. 


22  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

yond  the  cafes  in  Majfachufetts  Reports,  iv.,  128,  129 ; 
xvi.,  73,  and  Cujhings  Reports,  x.,  410,  which  are  alfo 
referred  to  by  Mr.  Juflice  Gray  in  a  ftill  more  recent 
and  authoritative  publication.  The  diftinguifhed 
ability  of  this  gentleman,  fo  long  recognized  and 
acknowledged  at  the  bar  in  Maflachufetts,  will  do 
ample  honor  to  the  bench  to  which  he  is  fo  juftly 
advanced.  We  entertain  the  higheft  refpect  for  his 
attainments,  his  judgment,  and  his  critical  fagacity ; 
but  in  this  inftance  we  think  he  has  fallen  into  a  ferious 
error,  which  not  even  the  great  weight  of  his  authority 
can  eftablifh  or  perpetuate  in  hiftory. 

In  an  elaborate  hiftorical  note  to  the  cafe  of 
Oliver  vs.  Sale,  £>uincy  s  Reports,  29,  he  fays  : 

cc  Previoufly  to  the  adoption  of  the  State  Confti- 
tution  in  1780,  negro  flavery  exifted  to  fome  extent, 
and  negroes  held  as  flaves  might  be  fold,  but  all 
children  ofjlaves  were  by  law  free" 

So  diftincl:  and  pofitive  an  aflertion  mould  have 
been  fortified  by  unequivocal  authority.  In  this  cafe 
Mr.  Gray  gives  us  two  or  three  dozen  feparate  refer 
ences.  Thefe  are  numerous  and  conclusive  enough 
as  to  the  fads  in  the  firft  claufes  of  his  ftatement— - 
that  negro  flavery  exifted  in  MafTachufetts,  and  that 
negro  Haves  might  be  fold  ;  but  for  the  laft  and  moft 
important  part  of  it,  that  all  children  of  Jlaves  were  by 
law  free ^  there  is  not  an  iota  of  evidence  or  author- 

1  In  the  cafe  of  Newport  vs.  Billing,  which  Mr.  Gray  believes  to  have 
been  "  the  lateft  inftance  of  a  verdift  for  the  mafter,"  it  was  found  by  the 
highest  court  in  MafTachufetts,  on  appeal  from  a  fimilar  decifion  in  the  in 
ferior  court,  "  that  the  faid  Amos  [Newport]  was  not  a  freeman*  as  he 
alledged,  but  the  proper  Have  of  the  faid  Jofeph  [Billing].  Records., 
•Lj6%,foL  284.  As  this  feems  to  have  been  one  of  the  fo-called  "  freedom 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  23 

ity  in  the  entire  array,  excepting  the  opinion  of  the 
Court  in  1796,  already  referred  to. 

This  cc  unanimous  opinion  of  the  Court,"  in  1796, 
which  has  been  fo  often  quoted  to  fuftain  the  reputa 
tion  of  MafTachufetts  for  early  and  confident  zeal 
againft  flavery,  will  hardly  fuffice  to  carry  the  weight 
afligned  to  it.  In  the  firft  place,  the  fads  proved  to 
the  jury  in  the  case  itfelf  were  fet  at  naught  by  the 
Court  in  the  ftatement  of  this  opinion.  We  quote 
them,  omitting  the  peculiar  phrafeology  by  which  they 
are  difguifed  in  the  report. 

An  action  was  brought  by  the  inhabitants  of  Lit 
tleton,  to  recover  the  expenfe  of  maintaining  a  negro, 
againft  Tuttle,  his  former  mafter.  It  was  tried  in 
Middlefex,  October  Term,  1796.  The  negro's  name 
was  Cato.  His  father,  named  Scipio,  was  a  negro 
flave  when  Cato  was  born,  the  property  of  Nathan 
Chafe,  an  inhabitant  of  Littleton.  Cato's  mother, 
named  Violet,  was  a  negro  in  the  fame  condition,  and 
the  property  of  Jofeph  Harwood.  Scipio  and  Violet 
were  lawfully  married,  and  had  iflue,  Cato,  born  in 
Littleton,  January  i8th,  1773,  a  flave,  the  property 
of  the  faid  Harwood,  as  the  owner  of  his  mother. 
Mafs.  Reports,  iv.,  128,  note. 

But  whatever  may  be  inferred  from  thefe  facts 
taken  in  connection  with  the  "opinion"  of  the  Court, 
in  1796,  we  afk  the  attention  of  the  reader  to  another 
cafe  a  little  later,  before  the  fame  tribunal.  In  the 
cafe  of  Perkins,  Town  Treafurer  offopsfield,  vs.  Emerson, 
tried  in  Eflex,  the  Court  held  that  a  certain  negro 

cafes,"  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  Mr.  Gray  did  not  afcertain  from  the  files 
whether  "  the  faid  Amos  "  was  a  native  of  Maflachufetts  ! 


24  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

girl  born  in  the  Province  in  Wenham  in  1759,  was  a 
(lave  belonging  to  Emerfon  from  1765  to  1776,  when 
flie  was  freed.  This  decifion  was  in  November,  1799. 
Danes  Abridgment,  n.,  412.  Thus  it  appears  that 
the  Supreme  Judicial  Court  of  Maffachufetts  inftruded 
a  jury  in  1796,  by  an  unanimous  opinion,  that  a  negro 
born  in  the  State  before  the  Conftitution  of  1780,  was 
born  free,  although  born  of  a  female  flave.  Three 
years  later,  the  fame  Court  and  the  fame  judges 
(three  out  of  four),1  held  a  negro  girl  born  in  the  prov 
ince  in  1759  to  have  keen  the  lawful  flave  of  a  citi 
zen  of  Maflachufetts  from  1765  to  1776.  In  the 
latter  cafe,  too,  the  decifion  of  the  Court  was  given 
on  the  queftion  of  law  alone,  as  prefented  upon  an 
agreed  ftatement  of  the  fads.  MS.  Copy  of  Court  Rec 
ords. 

A  cafe  in  Connecticut  prefents  an  illuftration  of 
great  importance.  It  is  that  of  cc  a  fugitive  flave,  and 
attempted  refcue,  in  Hartford,  1703,"  of  which  an 
account  is  given  in  one  of  Mr.  J.  Hammond  Trum- 
bull's  admirable  articles  on  fome  of  the  Connecticut 
Statutes.  Hiftorical  Notes,  etc.,  No.  vi. 

"The  case  laid  before  the  Honorable  General 
Affembly  in  October,  1704,"  after  a  ftatement  of  facts, 
etc.,  proceeds  with  reafons  for  the  return  of  the  fugi 
tive,  fome  of  which  we  quote. 

1  The  judges  prefent  at  thefe  Terms  refpeftively  were  the  following,  viz. : 

Ottober  Term,  1796,  in  Middlesex:  November  Term,  1799,  in  E/ex: 

Francis  Dana,  Chief  Juftice.  Francis  Dana,  Chief  Jujlice. 

Robert  Treat  Paine,  Robert  Treat  Paine, 

Increafe  Sumner,  Theophilus  Bradbury, 

Nathan  Cufhing,  Nathan  Cufhing,  Juftices. 
Thomas  Dawes,  jr.,  Juftices. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  25 

cc  i.  According  to  the  laws  and  conflant  fr attic  e  of 
this  colony  and  all  other  plantations^  (as  well  as  by  the 
civil  law)  Juch  ferjons  as  are  born  of  negro  bond-women 
are  themfehes  in  like  condition,  that  is,  born  in  fervi- 
tude.  Nor  can  there  be  any  precedent  in  this  government, 
or  any  of  her  Majefly  s  plantations^  produced  to  the  con 
trary}-  And  though  the  law  of  this  colony  doth  not 
fay  that  fuch  perfons  as  are  born  of  negro  women  and 
fuppofed  to  be  mulattoes,  mail  be  flaves,  (which  was 
needlefs,  becaufe  of  the  conflant  frattice  by  which  they 
are  held  as  Juch^)  yet  it  faith  expreffly  that  *  no  man 
mail  put  away  or  make  free  his  negro  or  mulatto  flave,' 
etc.,  which  undeniably  mows  and  declares  an  approba 
tion  of  fuch  fervitude,  and  that  mulattoes  may  be  held 
as  flaves  within  this  government." 

The  value  of  this  teflimony  on  the  fubject  is  en 
hanced  by  the  character  and  pofition  of  the  witnefs. 
He  was  Gurdon  Saltonftall,  born  in  Maflachufetts, 
the  fon  of  a  magiftrate,  educated  at  Harvard  College, 
and  afterwards  Governor  of  Connecticut, — "at  that 
time  the  popular  minifter  of  the  New  London  church, 
and  nearly  as  diftinguifhed  at  the  bar  as  in  the  pulpit. 
The  friend  and  confidential  advifer  of  the  governor 
(Winthrop),  who  was  one  of  his  parifhioners,  his  in 
fluence  was  already  felt  in  the  Colonial  Councils,  and 
he  was  largely  entrufted  with  the  management  of  public 
affairs.  In  general  fcholarfhip,  and  in  the  extent  of 
his  profeffional  ftudies,  both  in  divinity  and  law,  he 
had  probably  no  fuperior  in  the  colony :  as  an  advo- 

1  Lay,  in  his  traft  "  All  Slave-Keepers  Apoflates"  p.  1 1 .,  enumerating 
the  hardships  of  the  inftitution,  fays,  "  Nor  doth  this  fatisfy,  but  their 
children  alfo  are  kept  in  flavery,  ad  infinitum  ,-..." 


26  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

cate,  according  to  the  testimony  of  his  contemporaries, 
he  had  no  equal."  J.  Hammond  I'rumbull's  Hiftorical 
Notes.  Backus,  n.,  35.  tfrumbull's  Connecticut,  VoL  i. 
(1797),  417.  Mr.  Trumbull  alfo  mentions  a  queftion 
raifed  in  1722,  as  to  the  flatus  of  the  children  of 
Indian  captive-flaves,  in  a  memorial  to  the  Legiflature, 
from  which  it  is  apparent  that  no  doubt  was  enter 
tained  as  to  the  legal  flavery  of  children  of  negroes  or 
imported  Indians  from  beyond  feas. 

Ample  evidence  is  given  elfewhere  in  these  notes 
of  the  fact,  that  the  children  of  Haves  were  actually 
held  and  taken  to  be  flaves,  the  property  of  the 
owners  of  the  mothers,  liable  to  be  fold  and  trans 
ferred  like  other  chattels  and  as  aflets  in  the  hands  of 
executors  and  adminiftrators.1  This  fact  comes  out 
in  many  portions  of  this  hiflory ;  there  is  no  one 
thing  more  patent  to  the  reader.  The  inftances  are 
numerous,  and  it  is  needlefs  to  recapitulate  them  here; 
but  it  may  be  proper  to  refer  to  the  facts  that  in 
the  inductions  of  the  town  of  Leicefter  to  their 
representative  in  1773,  among  the  ways  and  means 
fuggefted  for  extinguishing  flavery,  they  propofed 
<c  that  every  negro  child  that  mall  be  born  in  faid 
government  after  the  enacting  fuch  law  fhould  be  free 
at  the  fame  age  that  the  children  of  white  people  are," 
and  in  the  petition  of  the  negro  flaves  for  relief  in 

1  "  A  bill  of  fale,  or  other  formal  inftrument,  was  not  neceflary  to 
transfer  the  property  in  a  flave,  which  was  a  mere  perfonal  chattel,  and 
might  pafs,  as  other  chattels,  by  delivery."  Milford  vs.  Bellingham,  1 6  Mafs. 
Reports,  no.  Governor  Dudley's  report  to  the  Board  of  Trade  on  flaves 
and  the  flave-trade  in  Maffachufetts,  etc.,  in  1708,  ftated  that  "in  Boston, 
there  are  400  negro  fervants,  one  half  of  whom  fwere  born  here"  Collections 
Amer.  Stat.  A/oc.,  i.,  586. 


Slavery  in  MaJJTachufetts.  27 

1777  to  the  General  Court  of  Maflachufetts,  they 
humbly  pray  that  cc  their  children  (who  were  born  in 
this  land  of  liberty)  may  not  be  held  as  flaves  after 
they  arrive  at  the  age  of  twenty-one  years."  Majs. 
Archives.  Revolutionary  Rejolves,  Vol.  VIL,  p.  132. 

The  Articles  of  Confederation  of  the  United 
Colonies  of  New  England,  I9th  May,  1643,  which 
commence  with  the  famous  recital  of  their  object  in 
coming  into  thofe  parts  of  America,  viz.,*  "  to  ad- 
vaunce  the  Kingdome  of  our  Lord  Jefus  Chrift,  and 
to  enjoy  the  liberties  of  the  Gofpell  in  puritie  with 
peace,"  practically  recognize  the  lawful  exiftence  of 
flavery. 

The  fourth  Article,  which  provides  for  the  due 
adjuftment  of  the  expenfe  or  cc  charge  of  all  juft  warrs 
whether  offenfive  or  defenfive,"  concludes  as  fol 
lows  : 

"  And  that  according  to  their  different  charge  of 
eich  Jurifdiccon  and  plantacon,  the  whole  advantage 
of  the  warr  (if  it  pleafe  God  to  blefs  their  Endeavours) 
whether  it  be  in  lands,  goods,  or  PERSONS,  mall  be 
proportionably  devided  among  the  faid  Confederats." 
Hazard,  n.,  3.  Plymouth  Records,  ix.,  4.  The  fame 
feature  remained  in  the  Conftitution  of  the  Con 
federacy  to  the  end  of  its  exiftence.1  See  Ratification 
of  1672.  Plymouth  Records,  x.,  349. 

The  original  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  provifion 
in  the  Federal  Conftitution  is  to  be  traced  to  this 

1  The  agreement  between  Leifler  of  New  York,  and  the  Commiflioners 
of  Maflachufetts,  Plymouth,  and  Connecticut,  May  i,  1690,  provided  that 
"all  plunder  and  captives  (if  any  happen)  mail  be  divided  to  ye  officers  and 
foldiers  according  to  ye  Cuftome  of  Warr."  N.  T.  Doc.  Hift.,  n.,  134,  157. 
Stoughton  and  Sewall  were  the  Commiflioners  for  Maflachufetts. 


28  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Confederacy,  in  which  Maflachufetts  was  the  ruling 
colony.  The  Commiflioners  of  the  United  Colonies 
found  occasion  to  complain  to  the  Dutch  Governor 
in  New  Netherlands,  in  1646,  of  the  fact  that  the 
Dutch  agent  at  Hartford  had  harbored  a  fugitive 
Indian  woman-flave,  of  whom  they  fay  in  their  letter  : 
"  Such  a  fervant  is  parte  of  her  mailer's  eflate,  and  a 
more  considerable  parte  than  a  beafl."  A  provision 
for  the  rendition  of  fugitives,  etQ.,  was  afterwards 
made  by  treaty  between  the  Dutch  and  the  Englifh. 
Plymouth  Colony  Records,  ix.,  6,  64,  190. 

Hiflorians  have  generally  fuppofed  that  the  trans 
actions  in  1644-5,  m  which  Thomas  Keyfer  and  one 
James  Smith,  the  latter  a  member  of  the  church  of 
Boflon,  were  implicated,  "  firfl  brought  upon  the 
colonies  the  guilt  of  participating  in  the  traffic  in 
African  Haves,"  Bancroft,  i.,  173-4. 

The  account  which  we  have  given  of  the  voyage  of 
the  firfl  colonial  flave-fhip,  the  Defire,  shows  this  to 
have  been  an  error,  and  that  which  we  mall  give  of 
thefe  tranfactions  will  expofe  another  of  quite  as  much 
importance. 

Hildreth,  in  whofe  hiflory  the  curious  and  in- 
flructive  dory  of  New  England  theocracy  is  narrated 
with  scrupulous  fidelity,  gives  fo  clear  an  account  of 
this  bufinefs  as  to  require  little  alteration,  and  we 
quote  him  with  flight  additions,  and  references  to  the 
authorities,  which  he  does  not  give  in  detail. 

This  affair  has  been  magnified  by  too  precipitate 
an  admiration  into  a  protefl  on  the  part  of  Maflachu 
fetts  againfl  flavery  and  the  flave-trade.  So  far,  how 
ever,  from  any  fuch  protefl  being  made,  the  firfl  code 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  29 

of  laws  in  Maflachufetts  eftablifhed  flavery,  as  we  have 
fhown,  and  at  the  very  birth  of  the  foreign  commerce 
of  New  England  the  African  flave-trade  became  a 
regular  buiinefs.  The  mips  which  took  cargoes  of 
ftaves  and  fifh  to  Madeira  and  the  Canaries  were  ac- 
cuflomed  to  touch  on  the  coaft  of  Guinea  to  trade  for 
negroes,  who  were  carried  generally  to  Barbadoes  or 
the  other  Englim  Iflands  in  the  Weft  Indies,  the  de 
mand  for  them  at  home  being  fmall.1  In  the  cafe 
referred  to,  inftead  of  buying  negroes  in  the  regular 
courfe  of  traffic,  which,  under  the  fundamental  law  of 
Maflachufetts  already  quoted,  would  have  been  per 
fectly  legal,2  the  crew  of  a  Bofton  mip  joined  with 
fome  London  veflels  on  the  coaft,  and,  on  pretence  of 
fome  quarrel  with  the  natives,  landed  a  "  murderer  " — 
the  expreflive  name  of  a  fmall  piece  of  cannon — at 
tacked  a  negro  village  on  Sunday,  killed  many  of  the 
inhabitants,  and  made  a  few  prifoners,  two  of  whom 
fell  to  the  mare  of  the  Bofton  fhip.  In  the  courfe  of 
a  lawfuit  between  the  mafter,  mate,  and  owners,  all 
this  ftory  came  out,  and  one  of  the  magistrates  pre- 
fented  a  petition  to  the  General  Court,  in  which  he 
charged  the  mafter  and  mate  with  a  threefold  offence, 

1  "  One  of  our  mips,  which  went  to  the  Canaries  with  pipe-ftaves  in  the 
beginning  of  November  laft,  returned  now  [1645]  and  brought  wine,  and 
fugar,  and  fait,  and  fome  tobacco,  which  me  had  at  Barbadoes,  in  exchange 
for  Africoes,  which  Jhe  carried  from  the  IJle  ofMaio"    Winthrops  Journal, 
ii.,  219. 

2  In  awarding  damages  to  Captain  Smith  againft  his  aflbciate  in  this 
bufmefs,  they  would  allow  him  nothing  for  the  negroes ;  but  the  reafon 
they  give  is  worth  quoting  here  : 

"  4.  *    *     For  the  negars  (they  being  none  of  his,  but  flolen]  we  thinke 
meete  to  alowe  nothing."     Mafs.  Records,  n.,  129. 

This  was  "  the  Court's  opinion"  "  by  both  howfes."  Ib.y  HI.,  58. 


30  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

murder,  man-ftealing,  and  Sabbath-breaking ;  the  two 
firfl  capital  by  the  fundamental  laws  of  Maflachufetts, 
and  all  of  them  cc  capital  by  the  law  of  God."  The 
magiftrates  doubted  their  authority  to  punifli  crimes 
committed  on  the  coaft  of  Africa ;  but  they  ordered 
the  negroes  to  be  fent  back,  as  having  been  procured 
not  honeftly  by  purchafe,  but  unlawfully  by  kidnap 
ping.  Hildreth,  i.,  282.  Mafs.  Records,  n.,  67,  129, 
136,  168,  176,  196;  in.,  46,  49,  58,  84.  Winthrotfs 
Journal,  n.,  243,  379. 

In  all  the  proceedings  of  the  General  Court  on 
this  occafion,  there  is  not  a  trace  of  anti-flavery 
opinion  or  fentiment,1  ftill  lefs  of  anti-flavery  legifla- 
tion ;  though  both  have  been  repeatedly  claimed  for 
the  honor  of  the  colony. 


Ill 

THE  colonifts  of  Mafiachufetts  affumed  to  them- 
felves  "a  right  to  treat  the  Indians  on  the  footing  of 
Canaanites  or  Amalekites,"  and  practically  regarded 
them  from  the  firfh  as  forlorn  and  wretched  heathen, 
pofleffing  few  rights  which  were  entitled  to  refpect. 
Bancroft,  in.,  408.  Bp.  Berkeley's  Works,  in.,  247. 

1  It  is  pofllble  that  the  petition  referred  to  in  the  following  extraft  from 
the  Records  may  have  related  to  this  fubjeft ;  but  it  left  no  impreflion 
which  can  be  traced. 

"  29  May,  1644.  Mr.  Blackleach  his  petition  about  the  Mores  was 
confented  to,  to  be  comitted  to  the  elders,  to  enforme  us  of  the  mind  of 
God  herein,  &  then  further  to  confider  it."  Mafs.  Records,  n.,  67.  Mr. 
John  Blackleach,  a  merchant,  was  of  Salem  as  early  as  1634,  and  repre- 
fentative  in  1636.  Some  of  his  letters  are  printed  in  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  iv.,  vii., 
146-155. 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  31 

Sermon  before  the  Soc.  for  the  Prop,  of  the  Gospel,  1731, 
/.  19.  Cotton  Mather's  fpeculations  on  their  origin 
illuftrate  the  temper  of  the  times* 

"We  know  not  When  or  How  thefe  Indians  firft 
became  Inhabitants  of  this  mighty  Continent,  yet  we 
may  guefs  that  probably  the  Devil  decoy' d  thefe 
miferable  Salvages  hither,  in  hopes  that  the  Gofpel 
of  the  Lord  Jefus  Chrift  would  never  come  here  to 
deftroy  or  difturb  his  Absolute  Empire  over  them." 
Magnalia,  Book  m.,  Part  in. 

The  inftructions  from  the  Commiflioners  of  the 
United  Colonies  to  Major  Gibbons,  on  being  fent 
againft  the  Narraganfetts  in  1645,  further  illuftrates 
this  fpirit. 

He  was  directed  to  have  "  due  regard  to  the 
honour  of  God,  who  is  both  our  fword  and  mield,  and 
to  the  diftance  which  is  to  be  obferved  betwixt  Chris 
tians  and  Barbarians,  as  well  in  warres  as  in  other 
negociations."  Of. this  Hutchinfon  says:  cclt  was 
indeed  ftrange  that  men,  who  profefled  to  believe  that 
God  hath  made  of  one  blood  all  nations  of  men  for  to 
dwell  on  all  the  face  of  the  earth,  mould  upon  every 
occafion  take  care  to  preferve  this  distinction.  Per 
haps  nothing  more  effectually  defeated  the  endeavors 
for  Chriftianizing  the  Indians.  It  feems  to  have  done 
more :  to  have  funk  their  fpirits,  led  them  to  intem 
perance,  and  extirpated  the  whole  race."  Hutchinfon' s 
Collection  of  Papers,  151. 

In  1646,  the  Commiflioners  of  the  United  Colo 
nies  made  a  very  remarkable  order,  practically  author 
izing,  upon  complaint  of  trefpafs  by  the  Indians,  the 
feizure  of  "  any  of  that  plantation  of  Indians  that  ihall 


32  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

entertain,  protect,  or  refcue  the  offender."  The  order 
further  proceeds:  cc  And,  becaufe  it  will  be  chargeable 
keeping  Indians  in  prifone,  and  if  they  fhould  efcape, 
they  are  like  to  prove  more  infolent  and  dangerous 
after,  that  upon  fuch  feazure,  the  delinquent  or  fatis- 
faction  be  againe  demanded,  of  the  Sagamore  or  planta 
tion  of  Indians  guilty  or  accefsory  as  before,  and  if  it 
be  denyed,  that  then  the  magiftrates  of  the  Jurifdiccon 
deliver  up  the  Indians  feafed  to  the  party  or  parties 
indamaged,  either  to  ferve,  or  to  be  mipped  out  and 
exchanged  for  Negroes  as  the  caufe  will  juftly  beare." 
Plymouth  Records,  ix.,  71. 

The  CommirTioners  themfelves  were  not  blind  to 
the  feverity  of  this  proceeding,  although  they  alleged 
that  it  was  "  juft." 

There  are  here  two  features  of  historical  importance 
which  the  reader  will  not  fail  to  notice,  viz.,  the  export 
for  trade  of  Indians  for  Negroes,  and  the  meafure  of 
"juftice"  in  thofe  days  between  the  colonifts  and  the 
natives. 

It  maybe  obferved  that  in  thefe  notes  we  have  not 
drawn  the  lines  between  the  Plymouth  Colony  and 
that  of  the  Maflachufetts  Bay.  In  this  connection 
they  may  juftly  be  regarded  as  one ;  indeed,  they  can 
not  be  feparated,  for  in  thefe  and  fimilar  proceedings, 
to  quote  a  fignificant  proverb  of  that  day,  "  the  Ply 
mouth  faddle  was  always  on  the  Bay  horfe." 

In  1658,  June  29,  certain  perfons  were  punifhed 
by  fines  by  the  County  Courts  at  Salem  and  Ipfwich 
for  attending  a  Quaker  meeting  and  otherwife  cc  syding 
with  the  Quakers  and  abfenting  themfelves  from  the 
publick  ordinances."  Among  them  were  two  children, 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  33 

Daniel  and  Provided  Southwick,  fon  and  daughter 
to  Lawrence  Southwick,  who  were  fined  ten  pounds, 
but  their  fines  not  being  paid,  and  the  parties  (as  is 
ftated  in  the  proceedings)  "  pretending  they  have  no 
eftates,  refolving  not  to  worke  and  others  likewife 
have  been  fyned  and  more  like  to  be  fyned  " — the 
General  Court  were  called  upon  in  the  following  year, 
May  n,  1659,  to  decide  what  courfe  ihould  be  taken 
for  the  fatisfaction  of  the  fines. 

This  they  did,  after  due  deliberation,  by  a  refolu- 
tion  empowering  the  County  Treafurers  to  fell  the 
faid  perfons  to  any  of  the  Englim  nation  at  Virginia 
or  Barbadoes — in  accordance  with  their  law  for  the 
fale  of  poor  and  delinquent  debtors.  To  accomplish 
this  they  wrefted  their  own  law  from  its  juft  applica 
tion,  for  the  fpecial  law  concerning  fines  did  not  per 
mit  them  to  go  beyond  imprifonment  for  non-pay 
ment.  Mafs.  Laws,  1675,  p.  $i.  Felt's  Salem,  u., 
581.  Mafs.  Records,  iv.,  i.,  366.  Mafs.  Laws,  1675, 
p.  6.  BiShop's  N.  E.  Judged,  85.  Hazard,  n.,  563. 

The  father  and  mother  of  thefe  children,  who  had 
before  fuffered  in  their  eftate  and  perfons,  were  at 
the  fame  time  banifhed  on  pain  of  death,  and  took 
refuge  in  Shelter  I  (land,  where  they  fhortly  afterwards 
died.  Mafs.  Records,  iv.,  i.,  367.  Hazard,  n.,  564. 
Bifhop,  83.  The  Treafurer,  on  attempting  to  find 
paflage  for  the  children  to  Barbadoes,  in  execution  of 
the  order  of  fale,  found  c<  none  willing  to  take  or 
carry  them."  Thus  the  entire  defign  failed,  only 
through  the  reluctance  of  thefe  mipmafters  to  aid  in 
its  confummation.  Bijhop,  190.  SeweFs  Hift.  of  the 
Quakers,  i.,  278. 
3 


34  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 

Provided  Southwick  was  fubfequently  in  the  fame 
year,  in  company  with  feveral  other  Quaker  ladies, 
"  whipt  with  tenn  ftripes,"  and  afterwards  cc  commit 
ted  to  prifon  to  be  proceeded  with  as  the  law  directs." 
Mafs.  Records,  iv.,  i.,  411. 

The  indignant  Quaker  hiftorian,  in  recounting 
thefe  things,  fays,  cc  After  fuch  a  manner  ye  have  done 
to  the  Servants  of  the  Lord,  and  for  Jpeaking  to  one 
another,  .  .  .  and  for  meeting  together,  ranfacking 
their  Eftates,  breaking  open  their  Houfes,  carrying 
away  their  Goods  and  Cattel,  till  ye  have  left  none, 
then  their  wearing  apparel,  and  then  (as  in  Plimouth 
government)  their  Land ;  and  when  ye  have  left  them 
nothing,  fell  them  for  this  which  ye  call  Debt.  Search 
the  Records  of  former  Ages,  go  through  the  Hiftories 
of  the  Generations  that  are  pad ;  read  the  Monuments 
of  the  Antients,  and  fee  if  ever  there  wtrtjuch  a  thing 
as  this  fince  the  Earth  was  laid,  and  the  Foundations 
thereof  in  the  Water,  and  out  of  the  Water.  .  .  .  O 
ye  Rulers  of  Bofton,  ye  Inhabitants  of  the  Majfa- 
chufetts I  What  fliall  I  fay  unto  you?  Whereunto 
fhall  I  liken  ye?  Indeed,  I  am  at  a  {land,  I  have  no 
Nation  with  you  to  compare,  I  have  no  People  with 
you  to  parallel,  I  am  at  a  lofs  with  you  in  this  point ; 
I  muft  fay  of  you,  as  Balaam  faid  of  Amalek  when  his 
eyes  were  open,  Bofton,  the  firft  of  the  Nations  that  came 
out  thus  to  war  again/I,  to  flop  IJrael  in  their  way  to 
Canaan  from  Egypt!'  Eiflwp>s  N.  E.  Judged,  90. 

At  the  time  of  King  Philip's  War,  the  policy  and 
practice  of  the  Colony  of  MafTachufetts,  with  regard 
to  flavery,  had  been  already  long  fettled  upon  the 
bafis  of  pofitive  law.  Accordingly  the  numerous 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  35 

"  captives  taken  in  war  "  were  difpofed  of  in  the  ufual 
way.  The  notes  which  follow  are  mainly  from  the 
official  records  of  the  colony,  and  will  be  fufficient  to 
mow  the  general  current  of  public  opinion  and  action 
at  that  period. 

In  Auguft,  1675,  the  Council  at  Plymouth  ordered 
the  fale  of  a  company  of  Indians,  "being  men,  weo- 
men,  and  children,  in  number  one  hundred  and 
twelve,"  with  a  few  exceptions.  The  Treafurer  made 
the  fale  "  in  the  countryes  behalfe."  Plymouth  Rec 
ords,  v.,  173. 

A  little  later  the  Council  made  a  fimilar  difpofi- 
tion  of  fifty-feven  more  (Indians)  who  "had  come  in 
a  fubmiffive  way."  Thefe  were  condemned  to  per 
petual  fervitude,  and  the  Treafurer  was  ordered  and 
appointed  "  to  make  fale  of  them,  to  and  for  the  ufe 
of  the  collonie,  as  opportunity  may  prefent."  Ib.,  174. 

The  accounts  of  the  Colony  of  Maflachufetts  for 
receipts  and  expenditures  during  "  the  late  War,"  as 
ftatedfrom  25th  June,  1675,  to  tne  23&  September, 
1676,  give  among  the  credits  the  following  : 

"  By  the  following  accounts  received 

in  or  as  filver,  viz.  : 
"Captives;  for  188  prifoners  at  war 

fold  397.13.00." 

Plymouth  Records,  x.,  401. 

There  is  a  peculiar  fignificance  in  the  phrase 
which  occurs  in  the  Records — "  fent  away  by  the 
Treafurer."  It  means  fold  into  flavery.  Mqfs.  Rec 
ords,  v.,  58. 

The  ftatiftics  of  the  traffic  carried  on  by  the  Trea- 


3  6  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

furers  cannot  be  accurately  afcertained  from  any  four- 
ces  now  at  command.  But  great  numbers  of  Philip's 
people  were  fold  as  flaves  in  foreign  countries.  In 
the  beginning  of  the  war  Captain  Mofeley  captured 
eighty,  who  were  confined  at  Plymouth.  In  Sep 
tember  following  one  hundred  and  feventy-eight  were 
put  on  board  a  veffel  commanded  by  Captain  Sprague, 
who  failed  from  Plymouth  with  them  for  Spain. 
Drake,  224. 

Thefe  proceedings  were  not  without  witnefTes 
againft  their  injuftice  and  inhumanity.  The  Apoftle 
Eliot's  earned  remonftrance  is  a  glorious  memorial 
of  his  fearlefs  devotion  to  reafon  and  humanity — to 
which  neither  rulers  nor  people  of  MafTachufetts  were 
then  inclined  to  liften. 

"To  the  Honorable  the  Governor  and  Council, 
fitting  at  Bofton  this  I3t.  of  the  6t,  75,  the  humble 
petition  of  John  Eliot,  Sheweth  that  the  terror  of 
felling  away  fuch  Indians  unto  the  Hands  for  perpetual 
flaves,  who  mall  yield  up  ymfelves  to  your  mercy,  is 
like  to  be  an  effectual  prolongation  of  the  warre,  and 
fuch  an  exafperation  of  them,  as  may  produce  we  know 
not  what  evil  confequences,  upon  all  the  land.  Chrift 
'hath  faide,  blefled  are  the  mercy  full  for  they  mall  ob 
tain  mercy.  This  ufeage  of  them  is  worfe  than  death 
...  it  feemeth  to  me,  that  to  fell  them  away  for 
flaves  is  to  hinder  the  inlargement  of  his  [Chrift's] 
kingdom  ...  to  fell  foules  for  money  feemeth  to  me 
a  dangerous  merchandize.  If  they  deferve  to  die,  it  is 
far  better  to  be  put  to  death  under  godly  governors, 
who  will  take  religious  care,  that  meanes  may  be  ufed, 
that  they  may  die  penitently.  .  .  .  Deut.  23  :  15-16. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  37 

If  a  fugitive  fervant  from  a  Pagan  Mafter  might  not 
be  delivered  to  his  matter  but  be  kept  in  Ifrael  for  the 
good  of  his  foule,  how  much  lefs  lawful  is  it  to  fell 
away  foules  from  under  the  light  of  the  gofpel,  into  a 
condition,  where  theire  foules  will  be  utterly  loft,  fo 
far  as  appeareth  unto  man."  Plymouth  Colony  Records, 
x.,  451-2.  Compare  Mather  s  Magnalia,  Book  vn., 
109  (753)3  concerning  the  neglect  to  frojelyte  the  Indians  y 
etc. 

There  is  nothing  to  mow  that  cc  the  Council  gave 
heed  to  the  petition  of  Eliot,"  but  a  careful  examina 
tion  of  the  archives  difclofed  only  a  report  of  a  Com 
mittee  of  the  General  Court,  dated  Nov.  5,  1675,  and 
adopted  by  the  Magiftrates  and  Deputies  the  fame 
day,  by  which  feveral  were  to  be  fent  away.1  MS. 
Letter. 

In  1676,  November  4th,  it  was  ordered  that  where 
as  there  is  an  Acte  or  order  made  by  the  Councell  of 
War  bearing  date  July,  1676,  prohibiting  any  male 

1  Eliot  appears  alfo  to  have  been  the  firft  in  America  to  lift  up  his 
voice  againft  the  treatment  which  Negroes  received  in  New  England.  To 
wards  the  end  of  his  life,  Cotton  Mather  ftates,  "  He  had  long  lamented 
it  with  a  Bleeding  and  Burning  Paflion,  that  the  Englifh  ufed  their  Negro's 
but  as  their  Horfes  or  their  Oxen,  and  that  fo  little  care  was  taken  about 
their  immortal  Souls  ;  he  look'd  upon  it  as  a  Prodigy,  that  any  wearing  the 
Name  of  Chriftians  mould  fo  much  have  the  Heart  of  Devils  in  them,  as  to 
prevent  and  hinder  the  Inftru&ion  of  the  poor  Blackamores,  and  confine  the 
fouls  of  their  miferable  Slaves  to  a  Defraying  Ignorance,  meerly  for  fear  of 
thereby  lofmg  the  Benefit  of  their  Vaffalage  j  but  now  he  made  a  motion  to 
the  Englijh  within  two  or  three  Miles  of  him,  that  at  fuch  a  time  and  Place 
they  would  fend  their  Negro's  once  a  week  to  him  :  For  he  would  then 
Catechise  them,  and  Enlighten  them,  to  the  utmoft  of  his  Power  in  the 
Things  of  their  Everlafting  Peace  ;  however,  he  did  not  live  to  make  much 
Progrefs  in  this  Undertaking."  Mathers  Magnalia,  Book  m.,  207  (325). 
Compare  also  p.  209  (327). 


3  8  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Indian  captive  to  abide  in  this  Jurifdiction  that  is 
above  fourteen  years  of  age  att  the  beginning  of  his  or 
their  captivity,  and  in  cafe  any  fuch  fhould  continue 
in  the  Collonie  after  the  time  then  prefixed  they  fhould 
be  forfeit  to  the  ufe  of  the  Gov1,  this  Court  fees  caufe 
to  ratify  and  confirme  that  order  and  acte,  and  do 
therefore  order ;  that  all  fuch  as  have  any  fuch 
Indian  male  captive  that  they  mall  difpofe  of  them 
out  of  the  Collonie  by  the  firft  of  December  next  on 
paine  of  forfeiting  every  fuch  Indian,  or  Indians  to 
the  ufe  of  the  Collonie ;  and  the  Conflables  of  each 
town  of  this  Jurifdiction  are  hereby  ordered  to  take 
notice  of  any  fuch  Indian  or  Indians  flaying  in  any 
of  the  refpedive  towns  of  this  Collonie  after  the  time 
prefixed,  and  mall  forthwith  bring  them  to  the  Trea- 
furer  to  be  difpofed  of  to  the  ufe  of  the  Government 
as  aforefaid.  Plymouth  Records,  xi.,  242. 

There  were  a  few,  about  five  or  fix,  exceptions 
made  to  this  order,  in  favor  of  certain  Indians,  who 
had  been  aflured  by  Capt.  Benjamin  Church  that  they 
fhould  not  be  fold  to  any  foreign  parts,  upon  good 
behavior,  &c.  /£.,  242. 

The  MafTachufetts  General  Court  made  an  order 
in  1677,  24  May,  that  the  Indian  children,  youths  or 
girls,  whofe  parents  had  been  in  hoftility  with  the 
Colony,  or  had  lived  among  its  enemies  in  the  time 
of  the  war,  and  were  taken  by  force,  and  given  or  fold 
to  any  of  the  inhabitants  of  this  Jurifdiction,  fhould  be 
at  the  difpofall  of  their  mafters  or  their  affignes,  who 
were  to  inflrud  them  in  Civility  and  Chriftian  reli 
gion.  Mafs.  Records,  v.,  136.  Note  the  diftinftion 
between  friendly  Indians  whofe  children  were  to  be  held 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  39 

until  24  years  of  age,  both  in  this  order  and  in  Plymouth 
Records,  v.,  207,  223. 

The  Court,  in  the  following  year  (1678),  found 
caufe  to  prohibit  cc  all  and  every  perfon  and  perfons 
within  our  jurifdiction  or  elfewhere,  to  buy  any  of  the 
Indian  children  of  any  of  thofe  our  captive  falvages 
that  were  taken  and  became  our  lawfull  prifoners  in 
our  late  warrs  with  the  Indians,  without  fpecial  leave, 
liking  and  approbation  of  the  government  of  this 
jurifdiction.  /£.,  253. 

In  the  fucceeding  year  (1679),  ^e  following  entry 
appears  in  the  records: 

"In  reference  unto  feverall  Indians  bought  by 
Jonathan  Hatch  of  Capt.  Church,  the  brothers  of  the 
woman,  defireing  mee  might  be  releafed,  appeared  in 
Court  with  the  faid  Jonathan  Hatch,  and  came  to 
competition  with  her  for  the  freedom  of  both  her  and 
her  hufband,  which  are  two  of  the  three  Indians  above 
named ;  and  her  brothers  payed  on  that  accompt  the 
fume  of  three  pounds  iilver  mony  of  New  England, 
and  have  engaged  to  pay  three  pounds  more  in  the 
fame  fpecie,  and  then  the  faid  man  and  woman  are  to 
be  releafed ;  and  for  the  third  of  the  faid  Indians,  it 
being  younge,  the  Court  have  ordered,  that  it  mall 
abide  with  the  faid  Jonathan  Hatch  untill  it  attains 
the  age  of  2.4  years,  and  then  to  be  releafed  for  ever." 
Plymouth  Records^  vi.,  1 5 

It  were  well  if  the  record  were  no  worfe;  but  to  all 
this  is  to  be  added  the  bafenefs  of  treachery  and  falfe- 
hood.  Many  of  thefe  prifoners  furrendered,  and  ftill 
greater  numbers  came  in  voluntarily  to  fubmit,  upon 
the  promife  that  they  and  their  wives  and  children 


40  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

fhould  have  their  lives  fpared,  and  none  of  them  trans 
ported  out  of  the  country.  In  one  inftance,  narrated 
by  the  famous  Captain  Church  himfelf,  no  lefs  than 
<c  eight  fcore  perfons  "  were  <c  without  any  regard  to 
the  promifes  made  them  on  their  furrendering  them- 
felves,  carried  away  to  Plymouth,  there  fold  and  trans 
ported  out  of  the  country."  Church,  23,  24,  41,  51, 
57.  Baylies,  in  his  Memoir  of  Plymouth  Colony,  Part  m., 
pp.  47,  48,  gives  fome  additional  particulars  of  this 
affair. 

"  After  the  deftruction  of  Dartmouth,  the  Ply 
mouth  forces  were  ordered  there,  and  as  the  Dart 
mouth  Indians  had  not  been  concerned  in  this  out 
rage,  a  negotiation  was  commenced  with  them.  By 
the  perfuafions  of  Ralph  Earl,  and  the  promifes  of 
Captain  Eels,  who  commanded  the  Plymouth  forces, 
they  were  induced  to  furrender  themfelves  as  prifoners, 
and  were  conducted  to  Plymouth.  Notwithftanding 
the  promifes  by  which  they  had  been  allured  to  fub- 
mit,  notwithftanding  the  earneft,  vehement,  and  in 
dignant  remonftrances  of  Eels,  Church,  and  Earl,  the 
government,  to  their  eternal  infamy,  ordered  the  whole 
to  be  fold  as  flaves,  and  they  were  tranfported  out  of 
the  country,  being  about  one  hundred  and  lixty  in 
number.  So  indignant  was  Church  at  the  commiffion 
of  this  vile  act,  that  the  government  never  forgave  the 
warmth  and  the  bitternefs  of  his  expremons,  and  the 
refentment  that  was  then  engendered  induced  them  to 
withhold  all  command  from  this  brave,  fkilful,  honeft, 
open-hearted  and  generous  man,  until  the  fear  of  utter 
destruction  compelled  them,  fubfequently,  to  entrufl 
him  with  a  high  command.  This  mean  and  treach- 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  41 

erous  conduct  alienated  all  the  Indians  who  were  doubt 
ing,  and  even  those  who  were  ftrongly  prediipofed  to 
join  the  Englim." 

Eaflon,  in  his  Relation,  p.  21,  says  :  "Philip  being 
flead ;  about  a  150  Indians  came  in  to  a  Plimouth 
Garrifon  volentarly.  Plimouth  authority  fould  all 
for  Slafes  (but  about  fix  of  them)  to  be  carried  out  of 
the  country." 

Church's  authority  from  Plymouth  Colony  to 
demand  and  receive  certain  fugitives  (whether  men, 
women,  or  children)  from  the  authorities  of  Rhode 
Ifland  government,  Auguft  28,  1676,  is  printed  in 
Hough's  Eaftoris  King  Philip* s  War,  p.  188.  He  was 
"  impowered  to  fell  and  difpofe  of  fuch  of  them,  and 
foe  many  as  he  mall  fee  caufe  for,  there :  to  the  In 
habitants  or  others,  for  Term  of  Life,  or  for  fhorter 
time,  as  there  may  be  reafons.  And  his  actinge,  here 
in,  mall  at  all  Times  be  owned  and  juftefied  by  the 
faid  Collony." 

Nor  did  the  Chriftian  Indians  or  Praying  Indians 
efcape  the  relentlefs  hoftility  and  cupidity  of  the 
whites.  Befides  other  cruelties,  instances  are  not 
wanting  in  which  fome  of  thefe  were  fold  as  (laves,  and 
under  accufations  which  turned  out  to*  be  utterly  falfe 
and  without  foundation.  Gookin's  Hift.  of  the  Chris 
tian  Indians. 

Some  of  them  are  probably  referred  to  by  Eliot, 
in  his  letter  to  Boyle,  Nov.  27,  1683,  in  which  he 
fays,  cc  I  defire  to  take  boldnefs  to  propofe  a  requeft. 
A  veflel  carried  away  a  great  number  of  our  furprifed 
Indians,  in  the  times  of  our  wars,  to  fell  them  for 
(laves ;  but  the  nations,  whither  me  went,  would  not 


42  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

buy  them.  Finally,  fhe  left  them  at  Tangier ;  there 
they  be,  fo  many  as  live,  or  are  born  there.  An 
Englishman,  a  mafon,  came  thence  to  Bofton,  he  told 
me  they  defired  I  would  ufe  fome  means  for  their  re 
turn  home.  I  know  not  what  to  do  in  it ;  but  now 
it  is  in  my  heart  to  move  your  honour,  fo  to  meditate, 
that  they  may  have  leave  to  get  home,  either  from  thence 
hither,  or  from  thence  to  England,  and  fo  to  get 
home.  If  the  Lord  mall  pleafe  to  move  your  charit 
able  heart  herein,  I  mail  be  obliged  in  great  thankful- 
nefs,  and  am  perfuaded  that  Chrift  will,  at  the  great 
day,  reckon  it  among  your  deeds  of  charity  done  unto 
them,  for  his  name's  fake."  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  in.,  183. 

Cotton  Mather  furnimes  another  extract  appropri 
ate  in  this  connection. 

"  Moreover,  'tis  a  Prophefy  in  Deut.  28,  68.  The 
Lord  fhall  bring  thee  into  Egypt  again  with  Jhips,  by  the 
way  whereof  Ifpake  unto  thee.  Thou  Jhalt  fee  it  no  more 
again  ;  and  there  Jhall  ye  be  fold  unto  your  Enemies,  and 
no  Man  Jhall  buy  you.  This  did  our  Eliot  imagine 
accomplifhed,  when  the  Captives  taken  by  us  in  our 
late  Wars  upon  them,  were  fent  to  be  fold,  in  the 
Coafls  lying  not  very  remote  from  Egypt  on  the 
Mediterranean  Sea,  and  fcarce  any  Chapmen  would 
offer  to  take  them  off."  Mather's  Magnalia,  Book 
in.,  Part  in. 

Mr.  Everett,  in  one  of  the  moil  elaborate  of  his 
finifhed  and  beautiful  orations,  has  narrated  the  ftory 
of  two  of  the  laft  captives  in  that  famous  war,  in  a 
paffage  of  furpafling  eloquence  which  we  venture  to 
quote : 

"  Prefident  Mather,  in  relating  the  encounter  of 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  43 

the  ist  of  Auguft,  1676,  the  laft  but  one  of  the  war, 
fays,  c  Philip  hardly  efcaped  with  his  life  alfo.  He 
had  fled  and  left  his  feage  behind  him,  alfo  his  fquaw 
and  fon  were  taken  captive,  and  are  now  prifoners  at 
Plymouth.  Thus  hath  God  brought  that  grand 
enemy  into  great  mifery  before  he  quite  deftroy  him. 
It  muft  needs  be  bitter  as  death  to  him  to  lofe  his 
wife  and  only  fon  (for  the  Indians  are  marvellous  fond 
and  affectionate  towards  their  children)  befides  other 
relations,  and  almoft  all  his  fubjects,  and  country 
alfo.' 

"  And  what  was  the  fate  of  Philip's  wife  and  his 
fon  ?  This  is  a  tale  for  hufbands  and  wives,  for 
parents  and  children.  Young  men  and  women,  you 
cannot  underftand  it.  What  was  the  fate  of  Philip's 
wife  and  child  ?  She  is  a  woman,  he  is  a  lad.  They 
did  not  furely  hang  them.  No,  that  would  have  been 
mercy.  The  boy  is  the  grandfon,  his  mother  the 
daughter-in-law  of  good  old  Maflafoit,  the  first  and 
beft  friend  the  Englifh  ever  had  in  New  England. 
Perhaps — perhaps  now  Philip  is  flam,  and  his  war 
riors  fcattered  to  the  four  winds,  they  will  allow  his 
wife  and  fon  to  go  back — the  widow  and  the  orphan 
— to  finifh  their  days  and  forrows  in  their  native 
wildernefs.  They  are  fold  into  flavery,  Weft  Indian 
flavery !  an  Indian  princefs  and  her  child,  fold  from 
the  cool  breezes  of  Mount  Hope,  from  the  wild  free 
dom  of  a  New  England  foreft,  to  gafp  under  the  lafh, 
beneath  the  blazing  fun  of  the  tropics  !  c  Bitter  as 
death  ;'  aye,  bitter  as  hell !  Is  there  anything, — I  do 
not  fay  in  the  range  of  humanity — is  there  anything 
animated,  that  would  not  ftruggle  againft  this?" 


44  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Everett's  Addrejs  at  Bloody  Brook,  1835;   Church,  62, 
63,  67,  68. 

Well  might  the  poet  record  his  fympathy  for  their 
fate — 

"  Ah  !  happier  they,  who  in  the  ftrife 
For  freedom  fell,  than  o'er  the  main, 
Thofe  who  in  galling  flavery's  chain 
Still  bore  the  load  of  hated  life, — 
Bowed  to  bafe  talks  their  generous  pride, 
And  fcourged  and  broken-hearted,  died !" 

or  in  view  of  this  phafe  of  civilization  and  progrefs, 
figh  for  that  elder  ftate,  when  all  were 

"  Free  as  nature  firft  made  man, 
Ere  the  bafe  laws  of  fervitude  began, 
When  wild  in  woods  the  noble  favage  ran." 

In  the  profecution  of  his  admirable  historical 
labors,  Ebenezer  Hazard,  of  Philadelphia,  endeavored 
to  afcer tain  what  was  done  with  the  fon  of  Philip.  He 
wrote  to  the  late  Judge  Davis,  of  Bofton,  who  was 
.unable,  at  that  time,  to  give  a  fatisfactory  anfwer. 
Mr.  Hazard  died  in  1817;  but  Judge  Davis  was 
afterwards  enabled  to  furnim  a  very  interesting  account 
of  the  affair,  derived  from  documents  communicated 
to  him  by  Nahum  Mitchell,  Efq. 

From  thefe  documents  he  learned  cc  that  the  ques 
tion,  whether  the  boy  mould  be  put  to  death,  was 
ferioufly  agitated,  and  the  opinion  of  learned  divines 
was  requefted  on  the  fubjecl.  The  Rev.  Mr.  Cotton, 
of  Plymouth,  and  the  Rev.  Mr.  Arnold,  of  Marm- 
field,  gave  the  following  anfwer  : 

"  The  queftion  being  propounded  to  us  by  our 
honored  rulers,  whether  Philip's  fon  be  a  child  of 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  45 

death  !  Our  anfwer,  hereunto  is,  that  we  do  acknow 
ledge,  that  rule,  Deut.  24:  16,  to  be  morall,  and  there 
fore  perpetually  binding,  viz.,  that  in  a  particular  act 
of  wickednefs,  though  capitall,  the  crime  of  the  parent 
doth  not  render  his  child  a  fubject  to  punifhment  by 
the  civill  magiftrate ;  yet,  upon  ferious  confideration, 
we  humbly  conceive  that  the  children  of  notorious 
traitors,  rebells,  and  murtherers,  efpecially  of  fuch  as 
have  bin  principal  leaders  and  actors  in  fuch  horrid 
villanies,  and  that  againfl  a  whole  nation,  yea  the 
whole  Ifrael  of  God,  may  be  involved  in  the  guilt  of 
their  parents,  and  may,fafoa  republic^  be  adjudged  to 
death,  as  to  us  feems  evident  by  the  fcripture  inftances 
of  Saul,  Achan,  Haman,  the  children  of  whom  were  cut 
off,  by  the  fword  of  Juftice  for  the  tranfgreffions  of 
their  parents,  although  concerning  fome  of  thofe 
children,  it  be  manifeft,  that  they  were  not  capable  of 
being  co-acters  therein.  Samuel  Arnold, 

September  7th,  1670.  John  Cotton." 

The  Rev.  Increafe  Mather,  of  Bofton,  offers  thefe 
fentiments  on  the  queftion,  in  a  letter  to  Mr.  Cotton, 
October  30,  1676. 

:c  If  it  had  not  been  out  of  my  mind,  when  I  was 
writing,  I  mould  have  faid  fomething  about  Philip's 
fon.  It  is  neceffary  that  fome  effectual  courfe  mould 
be  taken  about  him.  He  makes  me  think  of  Hadad, 
who  was  a  little  child  when  his  father,  (the  Chief 
Sachem  of  the  Edomites)  was  killed  by  Jpab ;  and, 
had  not  others  fled  away  with  him,  I  am  apt  to  think, 
that  David  would  have  taken  a  courfe,  that  Hadad 
mould  never  have  proved  a  fcourge  to  the  next 
,  generation." 


46  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

The  Rev.  James  Keith,  of  Bridgewater,  took  a 
different  view  of  thefubjed,  and  gave  more  benignant 
interpretations.  In  a  letter  to  Mr.  Cotton  of  the  fame 
date  with  Dr.  Mather's,  he  fays,  "  I  long  to  hear 
what  becomes  of  Philip's  wife  and  his  fon.  I  know 
there  is  fome  difficulty  in  that  pfalm,  137,  8,  9,  though 
I  think  it  may  be  confidered,  whether  there  be  not 
fome  fpecialty  and  fomewhat  extraordinary  in  it.  That 
law,  Deut.  24:  16,  compared  with  the  commended 
example  of  Arnafias,  2  Chron.  25  :  4,  doth  fway  much 
with  me,  in  the  cafe  under  confideration.  I  hope  God 
will  direct  thofe  whom  it  doth  concern  to  a  good  iffue. 
Let  us  join  our  prayers,  at  the  throne  of  grace,  with 
all  our  might,  that  the  Lord  would  fo  difpofe  of  all 
public  motions  and  affairs,  that  his  Jerufalem  in  this 
wildernefs  may  be  the  habitation  of  juftice  and  the 
mountain  of  holinefs  ;  that  fo  it  may  be,  alfo,  a  quiet 
habitation,  a  tabernacle  that  mall  not  be  taken  down." 

The  queftion  thus  ferioufly  agitated  would  not,  in 
modern  times,  occur  in  any  nation  in  Chriftendom. 
Principles  of  public  law,  fentiments  of  humanity,  and 
the  mild  influence  of  the  Gofpel,  in  preference  to  a 
recurrence  of  the  Jewifh  difpenfation,  fo  much  regarded 
by  our  anceftors  in  their  deliberations  and  decisions,1 
would  forbid  the  thought  of  inflicting  punifhment  on 
children  for  the  offences  of  a  parent.  It  is  gratifying 
co  learn,  that,  in  this  inftance,  the  meditated  feverities 
were  not  carried  into  execution,  but  that  the  merciful 


1  In  this  difcuflion,  however,  both  fcripture  rule  and  example  were  in 
favour  of  the  prifoner.  The  cafe  quoted  by  Mr.  Keith  from  2  Chronicles 
is  dire&ly  in  point.  "  But  he  flew  not  their  children,  but  did  as  it  is  writ 
ten  in  the  law  in  the  book  of  Mofes,"  &c. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  47 

fpirit  manifefted  in  Mr.  Keith's  fuggeftions  pre 
vailed.  In  a  letter  from  Mr.  Cotton  to  his  brother 
Mather,  on  the  2oth  of  March  following,  on  another 
fubject,  there  is  this  incidental  remark :  c  Philip's 
boy  goes  now  to  be  fold/ "  Davis1 s  Morton  s  Memorial, 
Appendix,  pp.  3  53- 5. 

In  the  winter  of  1675—6,  Major  Waldron,  a  Com- 
mifnoner,  and  Magiftrate  for  a  portion  of  territory 
claimed  by  Maflachufetts  (now  included  in  that  of 
Maine),  iflued  general  warrants  for  feizing every  Indian 
known  to  be  a  manflayer,  traitor,  or  confpirator. 
Thefe  precepts,  which  afforded  every  man  a  plaufible 
pretext  to  feize  fufpected  Indians,  were  obtained  by 
feveral  mipmafters  for  the  mod  fhameful  purpofes 
of  kidnapping  and  flave-trading.  One  with  his  veflel 
lurked  about  the  mores  of  Pemaquid,  and  notwith- 
ftanding  warning  and  remonftrance,  fucceeded  in  kid 
napping  feveral  of  the  natives,  and,  carrying  them  into 
foreign  parts,  fold  them  for  flaves.  Similar  outrages 
were  committed  farther  eaft  upon  the  Indians  about 
Cape  Sable,  "  who  never  had  been  in  the  leaft  manner 
guilty  of  any  injury  done  to  the  Englifh."  Hubbard 
adds  to  his  account  of  this  affair,  "  the  thing  alleadged 
is  too  true  as  to  matter  of  Fact,  and  the  perfons  that 
did  it,  were  lately  committed  to  prifon  in  order  to 
their  further  tryal."  If  the  careful  refearch  of  Mafla 
chufetts  antiquarians  can  difcover  any  record  of  the 
trial,  conviction  zndjuft  punimment  of  thefe  offenders, 
it  will  be  an  honorable  addition  to  their  hiftory — far 
more  creditable  than  the  conftant  reiteration  of  the 
ftory  of  "  the  negro  interpreter"  in  1646,  which  has 
been  fo  long  in  fervice,  "  to  bear  witnefs  againft  ye 


48  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

haynos  and  crying  finn  of  man-ftealing,"  in  behalf  of 
"The  Genrall  Corte"  of  Maffachufetts.  Hubbarfs 
Narrative,  1677,  pp.  29,  30.  Williamjon  s  Maine,  i., 

531- 

After  the  death  of  King  Philip,  fome  of  the  In 
dians  from  the  weft  and  fouth  of  New  England  who 
had  been  engaged  in  the  war,  endeavored  to  conceal 
themfelves  among  their  brethren  of  Penacook  who  had 
not  joined  in  the  war,  and  with  them  of  OfTapy  and 
Pigwackett  who  had  made  peace. 

By  a  "contrivance"  (as  Mather  calls  it)  which 
favors  ftrongly  of  treachery,  four  hundred  of  thefe 
Indians  were  taken  prifoners,  one  half  of  whom  were 
declared  to  have  been  acceflbries  in  the  late  rebellion; 
and  being  "  fent  to  Bofton,  feven  or  eight  of  them, 
who  were  known  to  have  killed  any  Englishmen,  were 
condemned  and  hanged ;  the  reft  were  fold  into  ilavery 
in  foreign  parts." 

Some  of  thofe  very  Indians,  who  were  thus  seized 
and  fold,  afterwards  made  their  way  home,  and  found 
opportunity  to  fatisfy  their  revenge  during  the  war 
with  the  French  and  Indians  known  as  King  William's 
War.  Belknap,  i.,  143,  245.  Mather  s  Magnalia, 
Book  vii.,  55  (699). 


IV. 


AT  firft,  the  number  of  flaves  in  MafTachufetts 
was  comparatively  fmall,  and  their  increafe  was  not 
large  until  towards  the  clofe  of  the  feventeenth  century. 
Edward  Randolph,  in  1676,  in  an  anfwer  to  feveral 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  49 

heads  of  inquiry,  &c.,  ftated  that  there  were  "not 
above  200  flaves  in  the  colony,  and  thofe  are  brought 
from  Guinea  and  Madagafcar."  He  alfo  mentioned 
that  fome  mips  had  recently  failed  to  thofe  parts 
from  MafTachufetts.  Hutchinfon's  Collection  of  Papers, 
pp.  485,  49 5.  Governor  Andros  reported  that  the 
flaves  were  not  numerous  in  1678 — cc  not  many 
fervants,  and  but  few  flaves,  proportionable  with  free 
men."  N.  T.  Col.  Doc.,  in.,  263. 

In  May,  1680,  Governor  Bradftreet  anfwered 
certain  Heads  of  Inquiry  from  the  Lords  of  the  Com 
mittee  for  Trade  and  Foreign  Plantations.  Among 
his  ftatements  are  the  following : 

"  There  hath  been  no  company  of  blacks  or  flaves 
brought  into  the  country  fince  the  beginning  of  this 
plantation,  for  the  fpace  of  fifty  years,  onely  one  fmall 
Veflell  about  two  yeares  fince,  after  twenty  months' 
voyage  to  Madagafcar,  brought  hither  betwixt  forty 
and  fifty  Negroes,  moil  women  and  children,  fold  here 
for  io/.,  I5/.  and  2O/.  apiece,  which  flood  the  mer 
chant,  in  near  4O/.  apiece:  "Now  and  then,  two  or 
three  Negroes  are  brought  hither  from  Barbadoes  and 
other  of  his  Majeftie's  plantations,  and  fold  here  for 
about  twenty  pounds  apiece.  So  that  there  may  be 
within  our  Government  about  one  hundred  or  one 

hundred  and  twenty There  are  a  very  few 

blacks  borne  here,  I  think  not  above  [five]  or  fix  at 
the  moft  in  a  year,  none  baptized  that  I  ever  heard 
of.  .  ."  M.H.S.  Coll.,  in.,  viii.,  337. 

The  following  century  changed  the  record.    Many 
"  companies"  of  flaves  were  "brought  into  the  coun 
try,"  and  the  inftitution  flourished  and  waxed  ftrong. 
4 


50  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Judge  Sewall  referred  to  the  "  numeroufnefs  "  of 
the  flaves  in  the  province  in  1706.  Gov.  Dudley's 
report  to  the  Board  of  Trade,  in  1708,  gave  four 
hundred  as  then  in  Bofton,  one  half  of  whom  were 
born  there  ;  and  in  one  hundred  other  towns  and 
villages  one  hundred  and  fifty  more — making  a  total 
of  five  hundred  and  fifty.  He  ftatedthat  negroes  were 
found  unprofitable,  and  that  the  planters  there  pre 
ferred  white  fervants  cc  who  are  ferviceable  in  war  pres 
ently,  and  after  become  planters."  From  January  24, 
1698,  to  25  December,  1707,  two  hundred  negroes 
arrived  in  Maflachufetts. 

Gov.  Shute's  information  to  the  Lords  of  Trade, 
in  1720,  Feb.  17,  gave  the  number  of  flaves  of  Mafla- 
chufetts  at  2,000,  including  a  few  Indians.  He  added 
that,  during  the  fame  year,  thirty-feven  male  and  fix- 
teen  female  negroes  were  imported,  with  the  remark, 
"  No  great  difference  for  feven  years  laft  paft."  Felt^ 
Coll  Amer.  Stat.  Ape.,  i.,  586. 

In  1735,  there  were  2,600  negroes  in  the  Province. 
In  1742,  there  were  1,514  in  Bofton  alone.  Douglafsy 
i.,  531.  Thefe  are  probably  very  imperfect  efti- 
mates,  as  it  is  well  known  that  regular  enumerations 
of  the  population  were  confidered  very  objectionable 
by  the  people  of  the  Bay.  Some  recalled  the  number 
ing  of  Ifrael  by  David,  and  perhaps  all  were  jealous 
of  the  poflible  defigns  of  the  Government  in  England 
in  obtaining  accurate  information  of  their  numbers 
and  refources.  It  is  a  curious  fact  that  the  firft  cenfus 
in  Maflachufetts,  was  a  cenfus  of  negro  flaves. 

In  1754,  an  account  of  property  in  the  Province 
liable  to  taxation  being  required,  Gov.  Shirley  fent  a 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  51 

fpecial  mefTage  to  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  in 
which  he  faid  : 

"  There  is  one  part  of  the  Eftate,  viz.,  the  Negro 
Slaves,  which  I  am  at  a  lofs  how  to  come  at  the  knowl 
edge  of,  without  your  afliftance."  Journal^  p.  119. 

On  the  fame  day,  November  19,  1754,  the  Legis 
lature  made  an  order  that  the  Affeffors  of  the  feveral 
towns  and  diftricts  within  the  Province,  forthwith 
fend  into  the  fecretary's  office  the  exact  number  of  the 
negro  flaves,  both  males  and  females,  iixteen  years  old 
and  upwards,  within  their  refpective  towns  and  dis 
tricts.  Ib^ 

This  enumeration,  as  corrected  by  Mr.  Felt,  gives 
an  aggregate  of  4,489.  The  census  of  Negroes  in 
1764-5,  according  to  the  fame  authority,  makes  their 
number  5,779,  in  1776,  5,249  ;  in  1784,  4,377,  in 
1786,  4,371  ;  and  in  1790  (by  the  United  States 
census)  6,ooi.2 

The  royal  instructions   to    Andros,    in   1688,   as 


'  curious  illuftration  of  "the  way  of  putting  it"  in  Mafla- 
chufetts,  in  Mr.  FELT'S  account  of  this  "  cenfus  of  flaves,"  in  the  Collections 
of  the  American  Statiflical  Affbciation,  Vol.  I.,  p.  208.  He  fays  that  the 
General  Court  pafled  this  order  "  for  the  purpofe  of  having  an  accurate 
account  of  flaves  in  our  Commonwealth,  as  a  fubjecJ  In  which  the  people 
'were  becoming  much  inter  efted,  relative  to  the  caufe  of  liberty  !  "  There  is 
not  a  particle  of  authority  for  this  fuggeftion  —  fuch  a  motive  for  their  aftion 
never  exifted  anywhere  but  in  the  imagination  of  the  writer  himfelf  ! 

2  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  we  have  no  official  authorities  on  the  fubjeft 
of  the  changes  in  this  clafs  of  population  during  the  period  from  1776  to 
1784.  There  is  a  moft  extraordinary,  if  not  incredible,  ftatement  made  by 
the  Duke  de  la  Rochefoucault  Liancourt  in  his  Travels  through  the  United 
States  .  .  .  in  the  years  1795,  1796,  and  1797,  of  which  a  tranflation 
was  publifhed  in  London  in  1799.  In  ^at  work,  Vol.  n.,  page  166,  he 
fays,  "  It  is  to  be  obferved,  that,  in  1778,  the  general  cenfus  of  Maflachu- 
fetts  included  eighteen  thoufand  flaves,  whereas  the  fubfequent  cenfus  of 
1790  exhibits  only  fix  tlioufand  blacks." 


$2  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 

Governor  of  New  England,  required  him  to  "  pafs  a 
law  for  the  reftraining  of  inhuman  feverity  which  may 
be  ufed  by  ill  mafters  or  overfeers  towards  the 
Chriftian  fervants  or  flaves  ;  wherein  provifion  is  to 
be  made  that  the  wilful  killing  of  Indians  and  Negroes 
be  punifhed  with  death,  and  a  fitt  penalty  impofed  for 
the  maiming  of  them."  N.  T.  Col.  Doc.,,  m.,  547.  The 
reader  will  note  the  distinction  in  thefe  inftructions 
between  the  Chriftian  fervants  or  Haves,  and  the 
Indians  and  Negroes.  It  points  to  a  feature  of  flavery 
in  MafTachufetts,  at  that  time,  which  we  propofe  to 
notice  in  another  portion  of  thefe  notes. 

The  Law  of  1698,  Chapter  6,  forbids  trading  or 
trucking  with  any  cc  Indian,  molato  or  negro  fervant 
or  (lave,  or  other  known  diflblute,  lewd,  and  diforderly 
perfons,  of  whom  there  is  juft  caufe  of  fufpicion." 
Such  perfons  were  to  be  punifhed  by  whipping  for  fo 
trading  with  money  or.  goods  improperly  obtained. 

The  Law  of  1700,  Chapter  13,  was  enacted  to  pro 
tect  the  Indians  againft  the  exactions  and  oppreflion 
which  fome  of  the  Englifh  exercifed  towards  them 
"  by  drawing  them  to  confent  to  covenant  or  bind 
themfelves  or  children  apprentices  or  fervants  for  an 
unreafonable  term,  on  pretence  of  or  to  make  fatisfac- 
tion  for  fome  fmall  debt  contracted  or  damage  done 
by  them."  Other  flmilar  acts  were  afterwards  pafled 
in  1718  and  1725,  the  latter  having  a  claufe  to  protect 
them  againft  kidnapping. 

In  1701,  the  Reprefentatives  of  the  town  of  Bofton 
were  "  defired  to  promote  the  encouraging  the  bring 
ing  of  white  fervants,  and  to  put  a  period  to  Negroes 
being  flaves."  Drakes  Bojton,  525.  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  n., 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  53 

viii.,  184.  We  have  no  knowledge  of  the  efforts 
made  under  this  instruction  of  the  town  of  Bofton,  but 
they  failed  to  accomplifh  anything.  Indeed,  the  very 
next  enadment  concerning  flavery  was  a  ftep  back 
ward  inftead  of  an  advance  towards  reform — a  meafure 
which  turned  out  to  be  a  permanent  and  effective 
barrier  againft  emancipation  in  Maffachufetts. 

The  Law  of  1703,  Chapter  2,  was  in  reftraint  of 
the  "  Manumiffion,  Difcharge,  or  Setting  free"  of 
"  Molatto  or  Negro  flaves."  Security  was  required 
againft  the  contingency  of  thefe  perfons  becoming  a 
charge  to  the  town,  and  "  none  were  to  be  accounted 
free  for  whom  fecurity  is  not  given  ;"  but  were  "  to 
be  the  proper  charge  of  their  refpective  mafters  or 
miftreffes,  in  cafe  they  ftand  in  need  of  relief  and 
fupport,  notwithftanding  any  manumiflion  or  inftru- 
ment  of  freedom  to  them  made  or  given,"  etc.1  A 
practice  was  prevailing  to  manumit  aged  or  infirm 
flaves,  to  relieve  the  mafter  from  the  charge  of  fup- 
porting  them.  To  prevent  this  practice,  the  act  was 

1  Jonathan  Sewall,  writing  to  John  Adams,  February  31,  1760,  puts  the 
following  cafe: 

"  A  man,  by  will,  gives  his  negro  his  liberty,  and  leaves  him  a  legacy. 
The  executor  confents  that  the  negro  mail  be  free,  but  refufeth  to  give 
bond  to  the  feleftmen  to  indemnify  the  town  againft  any  charge  for  his 
fupport,  in  cafe  he  mould  become  poor,  (without  which,  by  the  province 
law,  he  is  not  manumitted,)  or  to  pay  him  the  legacy. 

Query.  Can  he  recover  the  legacy,  and  how ? 

John  Adams,  in  reply,  after  illuftrating  in  two  cafes  the  legal  principle 
that  the  intention  of  the  teftator,  to  be  collefted  from  the  words,  is  to  be 
obferved  in  the  conftru&ion  of  a  will,  applied  it  to  the  cafe  prefented  as 
follows,  viz. : 

"  The  teftator  plainly  intended  that  his  negro  mould  have  his  liberty  and 
a  legacy ;  therefore  the  law  will  prefume  that  he  intended  his  executor 
fhould  do  all  that  without  which  he  could  have  neither.  That  this  in- 


54  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

paffed.  C.  J.  Parfons.  Winchendon  vs.  Hatfield  in  error, 
iv  Mafs.  Reports,  130.  This  act  was  ftill  in  force  as 
late  as  June,  1807,  when  it  was  reproduced  in  the 
revifed  laws,  and  continued  until  a  much  later  period 
to  govern  the  decifions  of  courts  affecting;  the  fettle- 

o  <-> 

ment  of  town  paupers.  An  unfuccefsful  attempt  to 
repeal  it,  will  be  found  duly  noticed  in  a  fubfequent 
portion  of  thefe  notes. 

The  Law  of  1703,  Chapter  4,  prohibited  Indian, 
Negro  and  Molatto  fervants  or  flaves,  to  be  abroad 
after  nine  o'clock,  etc. 

The  Law  of  1705,  Chapter  6,  "for  the  better  pre 
venting  of  a  Spurious  and  Mixt  Iffue,  &c. ;"  punimes 
Negroes  and  Molattoes  for  improper  intercourfe  with 
whites,  by  felling  them  out  of  the  Province.  It  alfo 

demnification  was  not  in  the  teftator's  mind,  cannot  be  proved  from  the 
will  any  more  than  it  could  be  proved,  in  the  firft  cafe  above,  that  the  tes 
tator  did  not  know  a  fee  fimple  would  pafs  a  will  without  the  word  heirs  5 
nor  than,  in  the  fecond  cafe,  that  the  devife  of  a  truft,  that  might  continue 
for  ever,  would  convey  a  fee  fimple  without  the  like  words.  I  take  it, 
therefore,  that  the  executor  of  this  will  is,  by  implication,  obliged  to  give- 
bonds  to  the  town  treafurer,  and,  in  his  refufal,  is  a  wrong  doer ;  and  I  can 
not  think  he  ought  to  be  allowed  to  take  advantage  of  his  own  wrong,  fo 
much  as  to  allege  this  want  of  an  indemnification  to  evade  an  a£Hon  of  the 
cafe  brought  for  the  legacy  by  the  negro  himfelf. 

But  why  may  not  the  negro  bring  a  fpecial  a6tion  of  the  cafe  againft  the 
executor,  fetting  forth  the  will,  the  devife  of  freedom  and  a  legacy,  and 
then  the  neceffity  of  indemnification  by  the  province  law,  and  then  a  refufai 
to  indemnify,  and,  of  confequence,  to  fet  free  and  to  pay  the  legacy  ? 

Perhaps  the  negro  is  free  at  common  law  by  the  devife.  Now,  the 
province  law  feems  to  have  beenjnade  only  to  oblige  the  mafter  to  main 
tain  his  manumitted  (lave,  and  not  to  declare  a  manumifTion  in  the  matter's 
lifetime,  or  at  his  death,  void.  Should  a  mafter  give  a  negro  his  freedom, 
under  his  hand  and  feal,  without  giving  bond  to  the  town,  and  mould  after 
wards  repent  and  endeavor  to  recall  the  negro  into  fervitude,  would  not  that 
inftrument  be  a  fufficient  difcharge  againft  the  mafter?"  Adams" 
i->  5i>  55- 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  55 

punifhes  any  Negro  or  Molatto  for  ftriking  a  Chris 
tian,  by  whipping  at  the  difcretion  of  the  Juftices  be 
fore  whom  he  may  be  convided.  It  alfo  prohibits  mar 
riage  of  Chriftians  with  Negroes  or  Molattoes — and 
irnpofes  a  penalty  of  Fifty  Pounds  upon  the  perfons 
joining  them  in  marriage.  It  provides  againft  un- 
reafonable  denial  of  marriage  to  Negroes  with  thofe 
of  the  fame  nation,  by  any  Matter — "any  Law, 
Ufage,  or  Cuftom,  to  the  contrary  notwithftand- 
ing." 

This  provifo  againft  the  unreafonable  denial  of 
marriage  to  negroes  is  very  interefting.  Legislation 
againft  the  arbitrary  exercife  and  abufe  of  authority 
proves  its  exiftence  and  the  previous  practice.  It  was 
as  true  then  as  it  is  now  that  the  inftitution  of  flavery 
was  inconfiftent  with  the  juft  rules  of  Chriftian 
morality. 

In  Pennfylvania,  five  years  before,  William  Penn 
had  propofed  to  his  Council,  <c  the  neceflitie  of  a  law 
[among  others]  about  ye  marriages  of  negroes."  The 
fubject  was  referred  to  a  committee  of  both  houfes  of 
the  legislature,  and  refulted  in  a  Bill  in  the  Aflembly, 
"for  regulating  Negroes  in  their  Morals  and  Marriages, 
etc.,"  which  was  twice  read  and  rejected.  Penn.  Col. 
Rsc.y  i.,  598.  606.  Votes  of  Affembly,  i.,  120,  121. 
This  proportion  of  Penn  was  in  accordance  with  the 
views  of  George  Fox,  whofe  teftimony  in  regard  to  the 
treatment  of  flaves,  given  at  Barbadoes  in  1671,  is 
elfewhere  referred  to  in  these  notes.  In  his  "  Gofpel 
Family  Order,  being  a  ihort  difcourfe  concerning  the 
Ordering  of  Families,  both  of  Whites,  Blacks,  and 
Indians,"  he  particularly  enforced  the  neceflity  of 


56  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

looking  after  the  marriages  of  the  blacks,  to  see  that 
there  was  fome  order  and  folemnity  in  the  manner, 
and  that  the  marriages  mould  be  recorded,  and  mould 
be  binding  for  life.  See  The  Friendy  VoL  xvn.  29,  4/0.,, 
Phil  1843. 

No  Chriftian  man  or  woman,  Quaker  or  Puritan, 
could  fail  to  be  mocked  at  the  loofenefs  of  all  such 
ties  and  relations  under  the  flave  fyftem.  One  folitary 
witnefs  againft  flavery  in  MafTachufetts  in  1700,  re 
ferred  to  the  well  known  c'  Temptations  Mafters  were 
under  to  connive  at  the  Fornication  of  their  Slaves, 
left  they  mould  be  obliged  to  find  them  Wives  or  pay 
their  Fines."  Sewally  1700.  The  laws  againft  the 
irregular  commerce  of  the  sexes  were  an  awkward  part 
of  a  fyftem  which  eftablifhed  and  protected  flavery, 
and  marriage  (fuch  as  it  was)  faved  the  expenfe  of 
conftant  fines  to  mafters  and  miftrefles  for  delinquent 
flaves. 

But  what  protection  was  there  for  the  married 
ftate  or  fanction  of  marital  or  parental  rights  and 
duties  ?  This  law  did  not  and  could  not  protect  or 
fanction  either,  and  muft  have  been  of  little  practical 
value  to  the  flaves.  Governed  by  the  humor  or 
intereft  of  the  mafter  or  miftrefs,  their  marriage  was 
not  a  matter  of  choice  with  them,  more  than  any 
other  action  of  their  life.  Who  was  to  judge  whether 
the  denial  of  a  mafter  or  miftrefs  was  unreafonable  or 
not  ?  And  what  remedy  had  the  flave  in  cafe  of 
denial  P1  The  owner  of  a  valuable  female  flave  was  to 


1  The  cafe  of  The  Inhabitants  of  Stockbridge  vs.  The  Inhabitants  of  Weft 
Stockbridge — regarding  the  fettlement  of  a  negro  pauper  (who  had  been  a 
foldier  in  the  American  Army  of  the  Revolution)  prefents  a  decifion  of  the 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  57 

confider  what  all  the  rifks  of  health  and  life  were  to 
be,  and  whether  the  increafe  of  ftock  would  reimburfe 
the  lofs  of  fervice.1 

The  breeding  of  flaves  was  not  regarded  with 
favor.2  Dr.  Belknap  fays,  that  cc  negro  children  were 
confidered  an  incumbrance  in  a  family ;  and  when 
weaned,  were  given  away  like  puppies."  M.  H.  S. 
Coll.,  i.,  iv.3  200.  They  were  frequently  publicly  ad- 
vertifed  "to  be  given  away," — fometimes  with  the 
additional  inducement  of  a  fum  of  money  to  any  one 
who  would  take  them  off. 

At  the  fame  time  there  is  no  room  for  doubt  that 
there  were  public  and  legalized  marriages  among  flaves 
in  MafTachufetts,  fubfequently  to  the  paflage  of  this 
aft  of  1705.  Mr.  Juftice  Gray  ftates  that,  "  the  fubfe- 
quent  records  of  Bofton  and  other  towns  mow  that 
their  banns  were  publifhed  like  thofe  of  white  perfons.3 

Supreme  Judicial  Court  of  Maflachufetts  in  1817,  not  only  recognizing  the 
faft  of  the  abfolute  legal  continuance  of  flavery  in  that  State  in  the  years  1770 
-1777  ;  but  fettling  a  point  of  law  which  is  interefting  in  this  connexion. 
At  that  time  "  no  contract  made  with  the  jla<ve  fwas  binding  on  the  mafter ; 
for  the  Jla<ve  could  have  maintained  no  aftion  again/I  him,  had  he  failed  to 
fulfil  his  promife  [a  promife  to  emancipate]  which  was  an  undertaking 
merely  voluntary  on  his  part."  Mafs.  Reports,  xiv.,  257. 

1  A  Bill  of  Sale  of  a  Negro  Woman  Servant  in  Bofton  in  1724,  recites 
that  "  Whereas  Scipio,  of  Bofton  aforefaid,  Free  Negro  Man  and  Laborer, 
purpofes  Marriage  to  Margaret,  the  Negro  Woman  Servant  of  the  faid 
Dorcas  Marfhall  [a  Widow  Lady  of  Bofton]  :     Now  to  the  Intent  that  the 
faid  Intended  Marriage  may  take  Effeft,  and  that  the  faid  Scipio  may 
Enjoy  the  faid  Margaret  without  any  Interruption,"  etc.,  me  is  duly  fold, 
with  her  apparel,  for  Fifty  Pounds.     N.  E.  Hifl.  and  Gen.  Reg.,  xviu.,  78. 

2  So  early  as  the  poet  Hefiod,  married  flaves,  whether  male  or  female, 
were  efteemed  inconvenient.     Works  and  Days,  line  406,  alfo  602-3. 

3  Mr.  Charles  C.  Jones,  of  Georgia,  in  his  work  on  the  Religious  Inflruc- 
tion  of  the  Negroes  in  the  United  States,  publifhed  at  Savannah,  in  1 842, 
gives,  pp.  34,  35,  memoranda  of  four  inftances  of  the   kind,  which  he  ob- 


58  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

In  1745,  a  negro  flave  obtained  from  the  Governor 
and  Council  a  divorce  for  his  wife's  adultery  with  a 
white  man.  In  1758,  it  was  adjudged  by  the  Superior 
Court  of  Judicature,  that  a  child  of  a  female  flave 
c  never  married  according  to  any  of  the  forms  pre- 
fcribed  by  the  laws  of  this  land/  by  another  flave, 
who  c  had  kept  her  company  with  her  matter's  con- 
fent,'  was  not  a  baftard."  Quincy  s  Reports,  30,  note. 
This  judgment  indicates  liberal  views  with  regard  to 
the  law  of  marriage  as  applied  to  flaves,  although  we 
fufpect  there  was  fpecial  occafion  for  the  exercife  of 
charity  and  mercy  which  might  deprive  it  of  any 
authority  as  a  leading  cafe. 

It  is  perfectly  well  known  that  it  was  practically 
fettled  in  Maflachufetts  that  baptifm  was  not  emanci 
pation — although  there  is  no  evidence  in  their  ftatutes 
to  fhow  that  the  quettion  was  ever  mooted  in  that 
colony,  as  it  was  in  other  colonies,  where  legislation 
was  found  neceflary  to  eftablifh  the  doctrine. 

Still  it  was  in  the  power  of  matters  in  Maflachu 
fetts  to  deny  baptifm  to  their  flaves,  as  appears  from 
the  following  extract,  from  Matthias  Plant  to  the 
Secretary  of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gofpel,  etc.  Anfwers  to  Queries,  from  Newbury, 
October  25,  1727  : 

"  6.  Negroe  Slaves,  one  of  them  is  defirous  of 
baptifm,  but  denied  by  her  Matter,  a  woman  of  wonder 
ful  fenfe,  and  prudent  in  matters,  of  equal  knowledge 
in  Religion  with  moft  of  her  fex,  far  exceeding  any  of 
her  own  nation  that  ever  yet  I  heard  of." 

ferved  in  looking  over  the  old  record  of  "  Entryes  for  Publications  "  (for 
marriages)  within  the  town  of  Bofton,  two  in  the  year  1707,  and  two  in  1710. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  59 

About  baptism  of  flaves  cc  borne  in  the  houfe,  or 
bought  with  monie,"  see  letter  of  Davenport  to  the 
younger  Winthrop,  June  14,  1666,  and  poftscript. 
M.  H.  S.  Coll.  in.,  x.,  60.  62. 

Mr.  Palfrey  gives  it  as  his  opinion,  that  cc  From 
the  reverence  entertained  by  the  Fathers  of  New  Eng 
land  for  the  nuptial  tie,  it  is  fafe  to  infer  that  (lave 
hufbands  and  wives  were  never  parted."  Hift.  N.  E.y 
ii.,  30,  note.  The  Fathers  of  New  England  alfo 
cherimed  a  due  regard  for  parental  and  filial  duties  and 
refponfibilities,  yet  it  is  certain  that  {lave  mothers  and 
children  were  feparated.  Refting  upon  "the  law  of  God, 
eftablifhed  in  Ifrael,"  the  Puritan  could  have  had  no 
fcruple  about  this  matter — fuch  a  condition  of  mar 
riage  to  the  flave  mufl  have  been  regarded  as  an 
axiom  as  it  was  by  the  Hebrew.  Compare  Exodusy .xxi., 
4,  5,  6.  Mr.  Palfrey's  inference  is  not  warranted  by 
the  fads. 

In  1786,  the  legiflature  of  the  State  of  Maflachu- 
fetts  parTed  an  "  Act  for  the  orderly  Solemnization  of 
Marriage,"  by  the  feventh  fection  whereof  it  was 
enacted  <c  that  no  person  authorized  by  this  act  to 
marry  mall  join  in  marriage  any  white  perfon  with 
any  Negro,  Indian  or  Mulatto,  under  penalty  of  fifty 
pounds  ;  and  all  fuch  marriages  mall  be  abfolutely 
null  and  void."  The  prohibition  continued  until 
1843,  wnen  it  was  repealed  by  a  fpecial  "act  relating 
to  marriage  between  individuals  of  certain  races." 

The  statute  of  1705  alfo  provided  an  import  duty 
of  four  pounds  per  head  on  every  Negro  brought  into 
the  Province  from  and  after  the  ist  day  of  May,  1706, 
for  the  payment  of  which  both  the  veflel  and  matter 


60  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

were  anfwerable.  A  penalty  of  double  the  amount  of 
the  duty  on  each  one  omitted  was  impofed  for  refufal 
or  neglect  to  make  the  prefcribed  entry  of  "  Number, 
Names,  and  Sex,  in  the  Impoft  Office."  A  drawback 
was  allowed  upon  exportation  and  the  like  advantage 
was  allowed  to  the  purchafer  of  any  Negro  fold 
within  the  Province,  in  cafe  of  the  death  of  his  Negro 
within  six  weeks  after  importation  or  bringing  into  the 
Province. 

fH/lr.  Drake  fays  that,  in  1727,  "the  traffic  in 
flaves  appears  to  have  been  more  an  object  in  Bofton 
than  at  any  period  before  or  fince."  Hift.  of  Bofton, 
574,  and  in  the  following  year  (1728)  an  additional 
"  Ad  more  effectually  to  fecure  the  Duty  on  the  Im 
portation  of  Negroes"  was  paffed,  by  which  more 
ftringent  regulations  were  adopted  to  prevent  the 
smuggling  of  fuch  property  into  the  Province,  and  the 
drawback  was  allowed  on  all  negroes  dying  within 
twelve  months. 

This  act  expired  by  its  own  limitation  in  1735, 
but  another  of  a  fimilar  character  was  paffed  in  1739, 
which  recognifed  the  old  law  of  1705  as  being  ftill  in 
force.1  It  reduced  the  time  for  the  drawback  on  the 
death  of  negroes  to  fix  months  after  importation. 

Free  Negroes   not  being  allowed  to  train  in  the 

1  "  Dec.  7,  1737,  Col.  Royal  petitions  the  General  Court,  that,  having 
lately  arrived  from  Antigua,  he  has  with  him  feveral  flaves  for  his  own  ufe, 
and  not  to  fell,  and  therefore  prays  that  the  duty  on  them  be  remitted.  The 
duty  was  £4  a-head.  This  petition  was  laid  on  the  table,  and  refts  there 
yet."  Brooks'1 s  Medford,  435.  The  aft  of  1739  was  for  ten  years,  and 
therefore  expired  in  1749.  We  have  found  no  repeal  of  the  old  law,  but 
the  proceedings  concerning  the  aft  propofed  in  1767  would  feem  to  mow 
all  the  old  a6h  of  Impoft  to  be  expired  or  obfolete. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  61 

Militia,  an  ad  pafled  in  1707,  Chapter  2,  required 
them  to  do  fervice  on  the  highways  and  in  cleaning 
the  ftreets,  etc.,  as  an  equivalent.  Thirty-three  free 
negroes  were  mentioned  in  the  minutes  of  the  Select 
men  of  Bofton,  in  1708,  to  whom,  according  to  this 
law,  two  hundred  and  eighteen  days  of  labor  were 
afligned  upon  the  highways  and  other  public  works. 
Lymans  Report,  1822.  The  fame  ad  prohibited  them 
to  entertain  any  fervants  of  their  own  color  in  their 
houfes,  without  permiflion  of  the  refpective  mafters  or 
miftrefles. 

In  1712,  an  act  was  pafled  prohibiting  the  importa 
tion  or  bringing  into  the  Province  any  Indian  fervants 
or  flaves.  The  preamble  recites  the  bad  character  of 
the  Indians  and  other  flaves,  "being  of  a  malicious, 
furley  and  revengeful  fpirit ;  rude  and  infolent  in  their 
behaviour,  and  very  ungovernable."  A  glimpfe  of 
poflible  future  reform  is  to  be  caught  in  this  act,  for 
it  recognizes  the  increafe  of  flaves  as  a  cc  difcourage- 
ment  to  the  importation  of  White  Chriftian  Servants." 
But  its  chief  motive  was  in  the  peculiar  circumftances 
of  the  Province  "under  the  forrowful  effects  of  the 
Rebellion  and  Hoftilities  "  of  the  Indians,  and  the 
fact  that  great  numbers  of  Indian  flaves  were  already 
held  in  bondage  in  the  Province  at  the  time. 

This  act  had  a  fpecial  reference  to  Southern  In 
dians,  the  Tufcaroras  and  others,  captives  in  war, 
chiefly  from  South  Carolina.  Governor  Dudley 
afterwards  entered  into  correfpondence  with  other 
colonial  governors,  about  preventing  the  fale  of  In 
dians  from  that  Province  to  the  Northern  colonies. 
Similar  acts  were  pafled  by  Pennfylvania  in  1712, 


62  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

New  Hampfliire  in  1714,  and  Connecticut  and  Rhode 
Ifland  in  1715. 

Under  the  earlier!  laws  of  taxation  in  Maflachufetts, 
flaves  muft  have  been  rated  (if  taxed  at  all)  as  polls, 
the  owners  paying  for  them  as  for  other  fervants  and 
children,  "  fuch  as  take  not  wages."  This  continued 
until  the  period  of  the  Province  Charter,  when,  in  the 
year  1692,  "every  male  flave  of  fixteen  years  old 
and  upwards  "  was  rated  "  at  Twenty  Pounds  Eftate." 
In  1694,  cc  all  Negro's,  Molattoes  and  Indian  Ser 
vants,  as  well  male  as  female,  of  16  years  old  and  up 
wards,  at  the  rate  of  iid.  per  poll  fame  as  other  polls." 
In  1695,  "all  Negro's,  Molatto,  and  Indian  Ser 
vants,  males  of  14  years  of  age  and  upward  at  the 
rate  of  2O/.  eftate,  and  Females  at  i^l.  eftate,  unlefs 
difabled  by  infirmity."  They  were  fubfequently  in  the 
fame  year  rated  cc  as  other  perfonal  eftate,"  which 
mode  was  continued  in  1696,  1697,  and  1698,  in  the 
latter  year  "according  to  the  found  judgment  and 
difcretion  of  the  Afleflbrs,  not  excluding  faculties." 

This  rating  for  "  faculties  "  was  a  prominent  fea 
ture  in  the  early  tax-laws  of  Maflachufetts,  and  was  con 
tinued  after  the  commencement  of  the  prefent  century.1 

It  was  applied  to  white  men  in  Maflachufetts  from 
the  beginning,  being  intended  as  a  juft  valuation  for 
thofe  who  had  arts,  trades,  and  faculties,  by  the  pro 
duce  of  which  they  were  <c  more  enabled  to  bear  the 
publick  charge  than  common  laborers  and  Workmen, 

1  Mr.  Felt  fays,  in  his  memoranda,  under  the  date  of  1829,  "  the  rating 
for  faculties,  long  a  prominent  item  in  our  former  tax-a6ls,  and  not  unfre- 
quently  made  a  fubjeft  of  pleafant  remark,  has  been  dropped,  like  other 
notions  of  ancient  cuftom.""  Coll.  Amer.  Stat.  Affoc.,  I.,  502.  See  also  pp. 
*97>  374- 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  63 

as  Butchers,  Bakers,  Brewers,  Victuallers,  Smiths,  Car 
penters,  Taylors,  Shoemakers,  Joyners,  Barbers,  Millers 
and  Mafons,  with  all  other  manual  perfons  and 
Artifts."  Mqfs.  Laws,  Ed.  1672,  p.  24.  The  law 
of  1698,  however,  appears  to  have  been  the  firft,  if 
not  the  only  one,  in  which  this  feature  was  applied  to 
the  "Negroes,  Molattoes  and  Indians"  in  bondage; 
and  may  be  juftly  regarded  as  an  indication  of  pro- 
grefs,  for  it  was  an  admiflion  that  thefe  unfortunate 
creatures  had  "  faculties,"  valuable  to  their  owners, 
if  not  to  themfelves.1 

There  was  little  variation  in  thefe  laws  during  the 
entire  colonial  period — all  Indian,  Negro,  and  Mu 
latto  fervants  continuing  to  be  rated  as  perfonal  pro 
perty — excepting  that  occafionally  fome  of  thofe  who 
were  fervants  for  a  term  of  years,  but  not  for  life, 
were  numbered  and  rated  as  polls. 

In  1716,  an  attempt  was  made  to  modify  this 
feature  of  the  legislation  of  Maflachufetts.  The  fol 
lowing  extract  from  Judge  Sewall's  Diary  is  copied 
from  the  original.  Though  quoted  by  Coffin,  in  his 
Hiflory  of  New  bury,  188,  and  Felt,  in  the  Coll.  Amer. 

1  The  early  records  of  the  town  of  Bofton  preferve  the  fa6l  that  one 
Thomas  Deane,  in  the  year  1661,  was  prohibited  from  employing  a  negro 
in  the  manufacture  of  hoops  under  a  penalty  of  twenty  millings,  for  what 
reafon  is  not  ftated.  Lyman's  Report,  1822.  Phillis  Wheatley's  was  not 
the  only  inftance,  in  Bofton,  of  the  negro's  capacity  for  intellectual  im 
provement.  A  worthy  Englifhman,  Richard  Dalton,  Efq.,  a  great  admirer 
of  the  Greek  daffies,  becaufe  of  the  tendernefs  of  his  eyes,  taught  his  negro 
boy,  Csefar,  to  read  to  him  diftinftly  any  Greek  writer,  without  underftand- 
ing  the  meaning  or  interpretation.  Douglafs,  ii.,  345.  In  the  Bofton 
Chronicle  for  September  21,  1769,  is  advertifed: — "  To  be  fold,  a  Likely 
Little  negroe  boy,  who  canfpeak  the  French  language,  and  very  fit  for  a 
Valet." 


64  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Stat.  AJJociation,  i.,  586,  it  is  not  correctly  printed  by 
either.  . 

"1716.  I  eflayed  June  22,  to  prevent  Indians  j 
and  Negroes  being  rated  with  Horfes  and  Hogs  ;  but 
could  not  prevail.  Col.  Thaxter  bro't  it  back  "  [from 
the  Deputies],  "and  gave  as  a  reafonofyr"  [their] 
"  Nonagreement,  They  were  juft  going  to  make  a  New 
Valuation." 

This  concife  mention  of  Judge  SewalFs  benevolent 
"  eflay,"  indicates  that  he  had  firft  propofed  the  matter 
in  the  Council,  of  which  he  was  then  a  member ;  and 
that  the  Council  agreeing,  their  decifion  was  fent  down 
to  the  Houfe  for  their  concurrence.  But  the  Houfe 
non-concurred ;  and  fignified  by  Colonel  Thaxter, 
that  they  declined  their  afTent  to  the  refolve  of  the 
Council,  for  the  reafon  that  "they  were  juft  going  to 
make  a  New  Valuation ;"  and  as  in  the  preceding 
valuations  of  the  property  of  their  constituents,  Indian, 
Negro,  and  Mulatto  ilaves  had  been  prominent 
articles,  they  muft  keep  on  flill  in  the  old  track; 
Indians,  Negroes,  and  Mulattoes  muft  ftill  be  valued 
as  property,  and  for  this  fpecies  of  property  their 
owners  muft  ftill  be  taxed.  MS.  Letter  of  Rev.  Samuel 
Sew  all. 

In  1718,  all  Indian,  Negro,  and  Mulatto  fervants 
for  life  were  eftimated  as  other  Perfonal  Eftate — viz : 
Each  male  fervant/0r  life  above  fourteen  years  of  age, 
at  fifteen  pounds  value  ;  each  female  fervant  for  life, 
above  fourteen  years  of  age,  at  ten  pounds  value. 
The  afleflbr  might  make  abatement  for  caufe  of  age 
or  infirmity.  Indian,  Negro,  and  Mulatto  Male 
fervants  for  a  term  of  years  were  to  be  numbered  and 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  65 

rated  as  other  Polls,  and  not  as  Perfonal  Eftate.1  In 
1726,  the  afleflbrs  were  required  to  eftimate  Indian, 
Negro,  and  Mulatto  fervants  proportionably  as  other 
Perfonal  Eftate,  according  to  their  found  judgment 
and  difcretion.  In  1727,  the  rule  of  1718  was  reftored, 
but  during  one  year  only,  for  in  1728  the  law  was  the 
fame  as  that  of  1726  ;  and  fo  it  probably  remained, 
including  all  fuch  fervants,  as  well  for  term  of  years 
as  for  life,  in  the  rateable  eftates.  We  have  feen  the 
fupply  bills  for  1736,  1738,  1739,  and  1740,  in  which 
this  feature  is  the  fame. 

And  thus  they  continued  to  be  rated  with  horfes, 
oxen,  cows,  goats,  fheep,  and  fwine,  until  after  the 
commencement  of  the  War  of  the  Revolution.  We 
have  not  feen  the  law,  but  Mr.  Felt  ftates  that  cc  in 
1776  the  colored  polls  were  taxed  the  fame  as  the 
white  polls,  and  fo  continued  to  be."  Coll.  Amer. 
Stat.  Affoc.,  i.,  475.  Seealfofp.  203,  311,  345,  411. 

In  the  inventory  of  Captain  Paul  White,  in  1679, 
was  "one  negrow  =  3O/."  In  1708,  an  Indian  boy 
from  South  Carolina  brought  357.  An  Indian  girl 
brought  fifteen  pounds,  at  Salem,  in  Auguft,  1710. 
The  higheft  price  paid  for  any  of  a  cargo  brought  into 
Bofton,  by  the  floop  Katherine,  in  1727,  was  eighty 
pounds.  The  eftate  of  Samuel  Morgaridge,  who  died 
in  1754,  included  the  following :  "  Item,  three  negroes 
1337.  6s.  8</."  Coffin's  Newbury,  188,  336.  Coll. 
EJ/ex  Inftitute,  i.,  14.  Felts  Salem,  n.,  416. 

"  The  Guinea  Trade,"  as  it  was  called  then,  fince 
known  and  branded  by  all  civilized  nations  as  piracy, 

1  Another  aft  of  the  year  1718  forbade,  under  heavy  penalties,  Matters 
of  Ships  to  carry  off  "  any  bought  or  hired  fervant  or  apprentice." 

5 


66  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

whofe  beginnings  we  have  noticed,  continued  to 
flourifh  under  the  aufpices  of  Maflachufetts  merchants 
down  through  the  entire  colonial  period,  and  long 
after  the  boafted  Declaration  of  Rights  in  1780  had 
terminated  (?)  the  legal  existence  of  flavery  within  the 
limits  of  that  State.  Felt's  Salem,  n.,  230,  261,  265, 
288,  292,  296.  To  gratify  thofe  who  are  curious  to 
fee  what  the  instructions  given  by  refpectable  mer 
chants  in  Maflachufetts  to  their  flave  captains  were 
in  the  year  1785,  we  copy  them  from  Felfs  Salem,  u., 
289—90;  probably  the  only  ipecimen  extant.1 

" ,  Nov.  12,  1785. 

"  Capt . 

"  Our  brig,2  of  which  you  have  the  command,  being  cleared  at 
the  office,  and  being  in  every  other  refpeft  complete  for  fea  ;  our 
orders  are,  that  you  embrace  the  firft  fair  wind  and  make  the  beft  of 
your  way  to  the  coafl  of  Africa,  and  there  inveft  your  cargo  in  flaves. 
As  flaves,  like  other  articles,  when  brought  to  market,  generally  appear 
to  the  beft  advantage ;  therefore,  too  critical  an  infpeftion  cannot  be 
paid  to  them  before  purchafe  ;  to  fee  that  no  dangerous  diftemper  is 
lurking  about  them,  to  attend  particularly  to  their  age,  to  their  counte 
nance,  to  the  ftraightnefs  of  their  limbs,  and,  as  far  as  poffible  to  the 
goodnefs  or  badnefs  of  their  conftitution,  &c.  &c.,  will  be  very  con- 
fiderable  objects. 

"  Male  or  female  flaves,  whether  full  grown  or  not,  we  cannot  par 
ticularly  inftrucl  you  about ;  and  on  this  head  fhall  only  obferve,  that 
prime  male  flaves  generally  fell  beft  in  any  market.  No  people  require 
more  kind  and  tender  treatment  to  exhilarate  their  Ipirits,  than  the 
Africans ;  and,  while  on  the  one  hand  you  are  attentive  to  this,  re 
member  that  on  the  other  hand,  too  much  circumfpeftion  cannot  be 
obferved  by  yourfelf  and  people,  to  prevent  their  taking  the  advantage 

1  Brooks' s  Medford  preferves  fimilar  inftru6Hons  in  1759,  and  a  fpecimen 
of  the  flave  captain's  day-book  on  the  coaft  of  Africa,  pp.  436-7. 

2  This  veflel  was  probably  the  Brig  Favorite.    Compare  Felt's  Salem,  u., 
287  and  291. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  67 

of  fuch  treatment  by  infurredtion,  &c.  When  you  confider  that  on 
the  health  of  your  flaves,  almoft  your  whole  voyage  depends ;  for  all 
other  rifques,  but  mortality,  feizures  and  bad  debts,  the  underwriters 
are  accountable  for ; — you  will  therefore  particularly  attend  to  fmoking 
your  veflel,  warning  her  with  vinegar,  to  the  clarifying  your  water 
with  lime  or  brimftone,  and  to  cleanlinefs  among  your  own  people,  as 
well  as  among  the  flaves. 

"  As  the  factors  on  the  coaft  have  no  laws  but  of  their  own  making, 
and  of  courfe  fuch  as  fuit  their  own  convenience,  they  therefore,  like 
the  Israelites  of  old,  do  whatfoever  is  right  in  their  own  eyes ;  in  con- 
fequence  of  which  you  ought  to  be  very  careful  about  receiving  gold 
duft,  and  of  putting  your  cargo  into  any  but  the  bell  hands,  or  if  it  can 
be  avoided,  and  the  fame  difpatch  made,  into  any  hands  at  all,  on  any 
credit.  If  you  find  that  any  faving  can  be  made  by  bartering  rum  for 
flops,  and  fupplying  your  people  with  fmall  ftores,  you  will  do  it ;  or 
even  if  you  cannot  do  it  without  a  lofs,  it  is  better  done  than  left  un 
done;  for  ihifts  of  clothes,  particularly  in  warm  climates,  are  very 
neceflary.  As  our  intereft  will  be  confiderable,  and  as  we  fhall  make 
infurance  thereon,  if  any  accident  fliould  prevent  your  following  the 
track  here  pointed  out,  let  it  be  your  firft  objecl:  to  proteft  publicly, 
why,  and  for  what  reafon  you  were  obliged  to  deviate.  You  are  to 
have  four  flaves  upon  every  hundred,  and  four  at  the  place  of  fale  ;  the 
priviledge  of  eight  hogflieads,  and  two  pounds  eight  ihillings  per  month  ; 
— thefe  are  all  the  compenfations  you  are  to  expect  for  the  voyage. 

"  Your  firft  mate  is  to  have  four  hogflieads  privilege,  and  your 
fecond  mate  two,  and  wages  as  per.  agreement.  No  flaves  are  to  be 
feledted  out  as  priviledged  ones,  but  muft  rife  or  fall  with  the  general 
fales  of  the  cargo,  and  average  accordingly.  We  fhall  expeft  to  hear 
from  you,  by  every  opportunity  to  Europe,  the  Weft  Indies,  or  any  of 
thefe  United  States ;  and  let  your  letters  particularly  inform  us,  what 
you  have  done,  what  you  are  then  doing,  and  what  you  expeft  to  do. 
We  could  wifh  to  have  as  particular  information  as  can  be  obtained, 
refpefting  the  trade  in  all  its  branches  on  the  coaft ;  to  know  if  in  any 
future  time,  it  is  probable  a  load  of  N.  E.  Rum  could  be  fold  for  bills 
of  exchange  on  London,  or  any  part  of  Europe ;  or,  for  gold  duft ; 
and  what  defpatch  in  this  cafe  might  be  made. 

"  You  will  be  careful  to  get  this  information  from  gentlemen  of 
veracity,  and  know  of  them  if  any  other  articles  would  anfwer  from 


68  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 

this  quarter.  We  fhould  be  glad  to  enter  into  a  contract,  if  the  terms 
would  anfwer,  with  any  good  factor  for  rum,  &c.  If  any  fuch  would 
write  us  upon  the  fubjeft,  and  enclofe  a  memorandum  with  the  prices 
annexed,  fuch  letters  and  memorandums  mail  be  duly  attended  to.  We 
are  in  want  of  about  five  hundred  weight  of  camwood,  and  one  large 
elephant's  tooth  of  about  80  Ibs.,  which  you  will  obtain.  If  fmall  teeth 
can  be  bought  from  15  to  30  Ibs.,  fo  as  to  fell  here  without  a  lofs,  at 
three  millings,  you  may  purchafe  zoo  Ibs.  Should  you  meet  with  any 
curiofities  on  the  coaft,  of  a  fmall  value,  you  may  expend  40  or  50 
gallons  of  rum  for  them.  Upon  your  return  you  will  touch  at  St. 
Pierre's,  Martinico,  and  call  on  Mr.  John  Mounreau  for  your  further 
advife  and  deftination.  We  fubmit  the  conducting  of  the  voyage  to 
your  good  judgment  and  prudent  management,  not  doubting  of  your 
belt  endeavours  to  ferve  our  intereft  in  all  cafes ;  and  conclude  with 
committing  you  to  the  almighty  Difpofer  of  all  events. 
"  We  wifh  you  health  and  profperity, 

"  And  are  your  friends  and  owners." 
« 

The  flaves  purchafed  in  Africa  were  chiefly  fold  in 
the  Weft  Indies,  or  in  the  Southern  colonies  ;  but 
when  thefe  markets  were  glutted,  and  the  price  low, 
fome  of  them  were  brought  to  Maflachufetts.  The 
ftatiftics  of  the  trade  are  fomewhat  scattered,  and  it  is 
difficult  to  bring  them  together,  but  enough  is  known 
to  bring  the  fubject  home  to  us.  In  1795,  one  in 
formant  of  Dr.  Belknap  could  remember  two  or  three 
entire  cargoes,  and  the  Doctor  himfelf  remembered 
one  fomewhere  between  1755  anc^  J7^5  which  confifted 
almoft  wholly  of  children.  Sometimes  the  verTels  of 
the  neighboring  colony  of  Rhode  Ifland,  after  having 
fold  their  prime  flaves  in  the  Weft  Indies,  brought 
the  remnants  of  their  cargoes  to  Bofton  for  fale.  Coll. 
M.  H.  £.,  i.,  iv.,  197. 

The  records  of  the  flave-trade  and  flavery  every 
where  are  the  fame — the  fame  difregard  of  human 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  69 

rights,  the  fame  indifference  to  fuffering,  the  fame 
contempt  for  the  oppreffed  races,  the  fame  hate  for 
thofe  who  are  injured.  It  has  been  afferted  that  in 
Maflachufetts,  not  only  were  the  miferies  of  flavery 
mitigated,  but  fome  of  its  worft  features  were  wholly 
unknown.  But  the  record  does  not  bear  out  the  fug- 
geftion ;  and  the  traditions  of  one  town  at  lead  pre- 
ferve  the  memory  of  the  moil  brutal  and  barbarous1 
of  all,  "  raifing  (laves  for  the  market."  Barry's  Han 
over,  175. 

The  firft  newfpapers  publifhed  in  America  illuftrate 
among  their  advertisements  the  peculiar  features  of 
the  inftitution  to  which  we  refer,  and  in  their  fcanty 
columns  of  intelligence  may  be  found  thrilling  accounts 
of  the  barbarous  murders  of  matters  and  crews  by  the 
hands  of  their  flave-cargoes.2  The  cafe  of  the  Amiftad 
negroes  had  its  occafional  parallel  in  the  colonial 
hiftory  of  the  traffic — excepting  that  the  men  of  New 
England  had  a  fympathy  at  home  in  the  iyth  and 
1 8th  centuries,  which  was  juftly  withheld  from  their 
Spanifh  and  Portuguefe  imitators  in  the  i9th.  Nor 
was  that  region  wholly  exempt  from  the  terror  by  day 
and  by  night  of  flave  infurredlions.  In  Coffin's  New- 
bury,  153,  is  a  notice  of  a  confpiracy  of  Indian  and 
negro  flaves  "to  obtain  their  inalienable  rights," — 
apparently  a  fcheme  of  fome  magnitude. 

1  "  The  flave-trade  can  be  fupported  only  by  barbarians  j  for  civilized 
nations  purchafe  flaves,  but  do  not  produce  them."     Gibbon,  Extraits  de 
man  Journal,  Oft.  19,  1763.     What  would  the  hiftorian  of  the  Decline  and 
Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire  have  faid  of  the  Virginia  of  the  nineteenth  cen 
tury! 

2  Eofton  News  Letter,  No.  1399,  Neva  England  Weekly  Journal,  No.  214, 
in  News  Letter,  No.  1422,  No.  1423. 


jo  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

As  the  advantages  of  advertifing  came  to  be  un- 
derftood,  the  defcriptions  of  flave  property  became 
more  frequent  and  explicit.  Negro  men,  women,  and 
children  were  mixed  up  in  the  fales  with  wearing  ap 
parel,  Gold  Watches,  and  other  Goods1 — "  very  good 
Barbados  Rum"  is  offered  with  "a  young  negro 
that  has  had  the  Small  Pox"2 — and  competitors  offer 
"Likely  negro  men  and  women  juft  arrived"3 — 
"  negro  men  new  and  negro  boys  who  have  been  in  the 
country  fome  time,"  4  and  alfo  "juft  arrived,  a  choice 
parcel  of  negro  boys  and  girls."1  "A  likely  negro 
man  born  in  the  country,  and  bred  a  Farmer,  fit  for  any 
fervice,"  6  "a  negro  woman  about  22  years  old,  with 
a  boy  about  5  months,"  7  &c.,  a  cc  likely  negro  wo 
man  about  19  years  and  a  child  of  about  fix  months  of 
age  to  be  Jold  together  or  apart"  *  and  cca  likely  negro 
man,  taken  by  execution,  and  to  be  fold  by  pub  lick 
auction  at  the  Royal  Exchange  Tavern  in  King  Street, 
at  fix  o'clock  this  afternoon,"9  muft  conclude  thefe 
extracts. 

At  this  point  it  may  be  neceffary  to  interpofe  a 
caution  with  reference  to  the  judgment  which  muft  be 
pronounced  againft  the  policy  which  has  been  illuftrated 

1  Bofton  News  Letter,  No,  1402.  2  N.  E.  Journal,  No.  aoo. 

3  N.  E.  Journal,  No.  217.  4  N.  E.  Journal,  No.  230. 

6  Bofton  News  Letter,  No.  1438,  Auguft  i2th  to  i9th,  1731. 

6  This  man  was  offered  for  fale  by  the  Widow  and  Adminiftratrix  to 
the  Eftate  of  Thomas  Amory  in  1731.     Bofton  News  Letter,  No.  1413. 

7  Bofton  News  Letter,  No.  1487,  July  2oth  to  July  27th,  1732. 

8  N.  E.  Weekly  Journal,  No.  267,  May  ift,  1732. 

9  The  Bofton  Gazette  and  Country  Journal,  No.  594,  Auguft  18,  1766. 
This  advertifement  is  a  conclufive  anfwer  to  the  claim  that  "  no  evidence 
is  found  of  fuch  taking  in  execution  in  MafTachufetts."     Dane's  Abridgment, 
II.,  314. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  71 

in  thefe  notes  ;  and  a  recent  writer  of  Englifh  hiftory 
has  fo  clearly  ftated  our  own  views,  that  his  language 
requires  very  little  change  here. 

It  would  be  to  mifread  hiftory  and  to  forget  the 
change  of  times,  to  fee  in  the  Fathers  of  New  England 
mere  commonplace  flavemongers  ;  to  themfelves  they 
appeared  as  the  elect  to  whom  God  had  given  the 
heathen  for  an  inheritance ;  they  were  men  of  ftern 
intellect  and  fanatical  faith,  who,  believing  themfelves 
the  favorites  of  Providence,  imitated  the  example 
and  aflumed  the  privileges  of  the  chofen  people,  and 
for  their  wildeft  and  worft  ads  they  could  claim 
the  fanction  of  religious  conviction.  In  feizing  and 
enflaving  Indians,  and  trading  for  negroes,  they  were 
but  entering  into  pofTeflion  of  the  heritage  of  the 
faints ;  and  New  England  had  to  outgrow  the  theol 
ogy  of  the  Elizabethan  Calvinifts  before  it  could  under- 
ftand  that  the  Father  of  Heaven  refpected  neither 
perfon  nor  color,  and  that  his  arbitrary  favor — if  more 
than  a  dream  of  divines — was  confined  to  fpiritual 
privileges.  Compare  Froudes  Hiftory  of  England,  Vol. 
viii.,  480. 

It  was  not  until  the  ftruggle  on  the  part  of  the 
colonifts  themfelves  to  throw  off  the  faft-clofing 
{hackles  of  Britim  oppreffion  culminated  in  open 
refiftance  to  the  mother-country,  that  the  inconfiftency 
of  maintaining  flavery  with  one  hand  while  pleading 
or  ftriking  for  freedom  with  the  other,  compelled  a  re 
luctant  and  gradual  change  in  public  opinion  on  this 
fubject. 

If  it  be  true  that  at  no  period  of  her  colonial 
and  provincial  hiftory  was  Maflachufetts  without  her 


72  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

"  proteftants "  againft  the  v/hole  fyftem ;  their  ex 
ample  was  powerlefs  in  that  day  and  generation. 
The  words  and  thoughts  of  a  Williams,  an  Eliot,  and 
a  Sewall,  fell  unheeded  and  unnoticed  on  the  ears  and 
hearts  of  the  magiftrates  and  people  of  their  time,  as 
the  acorn  fell  two  centuries  ago  in  the  forefts  by  which 
they  were  furrounded. a 


V. 


BUT  the  humane  efforts  of  Roger  Williams  and 
John  Eliot  to  abate  the  feverity  of  judgment  againft 
captives,  and  mitigate  the  horrors  of  flavery  in 
Maflachufetts,  hardly  amounted  to  a  pofitive  proteft 
againft  the  inftitution  itfelf.  In  their  time  there  was 
no  public  opinion  againft  flavery,  and  probably  very 
little  exercife  of  private  judgment  againft  it.  Even 
among  the  Quakers  the  inner  light  had  not  yet  dis- 
clofed  its  enormity,  or  awakened  tender  confciences  to 
its  utter  wickednefs. 

There  were  two  fignal  exceptions  to  the  general 

1  In  this  fentence,  as  originally  printed  in  the  Hiftorical  Magazine,  a 
"  Dudley  "  was  included  among  thofe  indicated  as  having  been  in  advance 
of  their  contemporaries  on  this  fubjeft.  The  reference  was  to  Paul  Dudley, 
who  was  the  author  of  a  tracl,  publifhed  in  1731,  entitled,  "  An  EfTay  on 
the  Merchandife  of  Slaves  and  Souls  of  Men.  With  an  Application  to  the 
Church  of  Rome."  This  title,  and  references  to  the  tra£t  by  others,  gave  us 
the  impreflion  that  it  was  againft  Slavery  ;  but  an  opportunity  recently  en 
joyed  of  examining  the  traft  itfelf,  showed  the  miftake.  It  is  altogether 
(  an  Application  to  the  Church  of  Rome," — in  fa6t,  "  an  oration  againft 
Popery,"  of  which  Maffachufetts  had  a  much  greater  horror  than  of 
flavery. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  73 

theory  and  practice  of  that  period  on  this  fubjed, 
both  of  which  deferve  to  be  had  in  everlafting  re 
membrance.  We  fhall  make  no  apology  for  noticing 
them  in  this  place,  although  their  connection  with  the 
hiftory  of  flavery  in  MafTachufetts  is  very  remote. 

Among  the  "  Ads  and  Orders  made  at  the  Generall 
Court  of  Election  held  at  Warwicke  this  i8th  day  of 
May,  anno  1652,"  "  The  Commiffioners  of  Provi 
dence  and  Warwicke  being  lawfully  mett  and  fett," 
on  the  fecond  day  of  their  feffion  (i9th  May,  1652), 
enaded  and  ordered  as  follows,  viz.  : 

"WHEREAS,  there  is  a  common  courfe  pradifed 
among  Englishmen  to  buy  negers,  to  that  end  they 
may  have  them  for  fervice  or  flaves  for  ever  ;  for  the 
preventinge  of  fuch  pradices  among  us,  let  it  be 
ordered,  that  no  blacke  mankind  or  white  being 
forced  by  covenant  bond,  or  otherwife,  to  ferve  any 
man  or  his  aflighnes  longer  than  ten  yeares,  or  untill 
they  come  to  bee  twentiefour  yeares  of  age,  if  they  bee 
taken  in  under  fourteen,  from  the  time  of  their 
cominge  within  the  liberties  of  this  Collonie.  And 
at  the  end  or  terme  of  ten  yeares  to  fett  them  free,  as 
is  the  manner  with  the  Englim  fervants.  And  that 
man  that  will  not  let  them  goe  free,  or  fhall  fell  them 
away  elfewhere,  to  that  end  that  they  may  be  enflaved 
to  others  for  a  long  time,  hee  or  they  fhall  forfeit  to 
the  Collonie  forty  pounds."  R.  I.  Records,  i.,  248. 

This  noble  ad  ftands  out  in  fblitary  grandeur  in 
the  middle  of  the  feventeenth  century,  the  firfl  legis 
lative  enadment  in  the  hiftory  of  this  continent,  if 
not  of  the  world,  for  the  fuppreflion  of  involuntary 
fervitude.  But,  unhappily,  it  was  not  enforced,  even 


74  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

in  the  towns  over  which  the  authority  of  the  Com- 
miffioners  extended.1 

The  other  exception  to  which  we  have  referred  is 
to  be  found  in  the  following  declaration  againfb  llavery 
by  the  Quakers  of  Germantown,  Pennfylvania,  in 
1688.  Thefe  were  a  "little  handful"  of  German 
Friends  from  Cresheim,  a  town  not  far  from  Worms, 
in  the  Palatinate. 

We  are  indebted  to  the  curious  and  zealous 
refearch  of  Mr.  Nathan  Kite,  of  Philadelphia,  for  the 
publication  of  this  interefting  memorial.  It  appeared 
in  ^he  Friend,  Vol.  xvii.,  No.  16,  January  13,  1844. 
The  paper  from  which  Mr.  Kite  copied  was  the 
original.  At  the  foot  of  the  addrefs,  John  Hart,  the 
clerk  of  the  Monthly  Meeting,  made  his  minute,  and 
that  paper  having  been  then  forwarded  to  the  Quar 
terly  Meeting,  received  a  few  lines  from  Anthony 
Morris,  the  clerk  of  that  body,  to  introduce  it  to  the 
Yearly  Meeting,  to  which  it  was  then  directed. 

"  This  is  to  the  monthly  meeting  held  at  Richard 
Worrell's : 

cc  Thefe  are  the  reafons  why  we  are  againfl  the 
traffic  of  men-body,  as  followeth  :  Is  there  any  that 
would  be  done  or  handled  at  this  manner  ?  viz.,  to  be 
fold  or  made  a  flave  for  all  the  time  of  his  life  ?  How 
fearful  and  faint-hearted  are  many  at  fea,  when  they 
fee  a  flrange  veflel,  being  afraid  it  mould  be  a  Turk, 

1  Compare  Arnold,  I.,  240.  We  omit  his  miftaken  deference  to  Mafla- 
chufetts  in  regard  to  the  A61  of  1646 — fo  long  mifunderftood  or  mifrepre- 
fented  as  a  proteft  againft  flavery.  See  ante,  pp.  28-30.  Alfo  Bancroft,  I., 
174,  and  Hildreth,  I.,  373. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  75 

and  they  fhould  be  taken,  and  fold  for  flaves  into 
Turkey.  Now,  what  is  this  better  done,  than  Turks 
do  ?  Yea,  rather  it  is  worfe  for  them,  which  fay  they 
are  Chriftians  ;  for  we  hear  that  the  moil  part  of  fuch 
negers  are  brought  hither  againft  their  will  and  con- 
fent,  and  that  many  of  them  are  flolen.  Now,  though 
they  are  black,  we  cannot  conceive  there  is  more 
liberty  to  have  them  flaves,  as  [than]  it  is  to  have 
other  white  ones.  There  is  a  faying,  that  we  fhould 
do  to  all  men  like  as  we  will  be  done  ourfelves ; 
making  no  difference  of  what  generation,  defcent,  or 
colour  they  are.  And  thofe  who  fteal  or  rob  men, 
and  thofe  who  buy  or  purchafe  them,  are  they  not  all 
alike?  Here  is  liberty  of  confcience,  which  is  right 
and  reafonable ;  here  ought  to  be  likewife  liberty  of 
the  body,  except  of  evil-doers,  which  is  another  cafe. 
But  to  bring  men  hither,  or  to  rob  and  fell  them 
againft  their  will,  we  fland  againft.  In  Europe,  there 
are  many  opprefled  for  confcience-fake ;  and  here 
there  are  thofe  opprefled  which  are  of  a  black  colour. 
And  we  who  know  that  men  muft  not  commit  adultery 
— fome  do  commit  adultery  in  others,  feparating 
wives  from  their  hufbands,  and  giving  them  to  others  : 
and  fome  fell  the  children  of  thefe  poor  creatures  to 
other  men.  Ah !  do  confider  well  this  thing,  you 
who  do  it,  if  you  would  be  done  at  this  manner — and 
if  it  is  done  according  to  Chriflianity  !  You  furpafs 
Holland  and  Germany  in  this  thing.  This  makes  an 
ill  report  in  all  thofe  countries  of  Europe,  where  they 
hear  of  [it,]  that  the  Quakers  do  here  handel  men  as 
they  handel  there  the  cattle.  And  for  that  reafon 
fome  have  no  mind  or  inclination  to  come  hither. 


7  6  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

And  who  fhall  maintain  this  your  caufe,  or  plead  for 
it  ?  Truly,  we  cannot  do  fo,  except  you  fhall  inform 
us  better  hereof,  viz. :  that  Chriftians  have  liberty  to 
practife  thefe  things.  Pray,  what  thing  in  the  world 
can  be  done  worfe  towards  us,  than  if  men  mould  rob 
or  fteal  us  away,  and  fell  us  for  flaves  to  flrange 
countries ;  feparating  hufbands  from  their  wives  and 
children.  Being  now  this  is  not  done  in  the  manner 
we  would  be  done  at,  [by]  ;  therefore,  we  contradict, 
and  are  againft  this  traffic  of  men-body.  And  we 
who  profefs  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  fteal,  mutt,  like- 
wife,  avoid  to  purchafe  fuch  things  as  are  ftolen,  but 
rather  help  to  flop  this  robbing  and  ftealing,  if  poflible. 
And  fuch  men  ought  to  be  delivered  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  robbers,  and  fet  free  as  in  Europe.  Then  is 
Pennfylvania  to  have  a  good  report,  inftead,  it  hath 
now  a  bad  one,  for  this  fake,  in  other  countries : 
Efpecially  whereas  the  Europeans  are  defirous  to  know 
in  what  manner  the  Quakers  do  rule  in  their  province ; 
and  moft  of  them  do  look  upon  us  with  an  envious 
eye.  But  if  this  is  done  well,  what  mail  we  fay  is 
done  evil  ? 

"If  once  thefe  flaves  (which  they  fay  are  fo  wicked 
and  flubborn  men,)  mould  join  themfelves — fight  for 
their  freedom,  and  handel  their  mafters  and  miftrefTes, 
as  they  did  handel  them  before ;  will  thefe  mafters  and 
miftrefTes  take  the  fword  at  hand  and  war  againft  thefe 
poor  flaves,  like,  as  we  are  able  to  believe,  fome  will 
not  refufe  to  do  ?  Or,  have  thefe  poor  negers  not  as 
much  right  to  fight  for  their  freedom,  as  you  have  to 
keep  them  flaves  ? 

"  Now  confider  well  this  thing,  if  it  is  good  or 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  77 

bad.  And  in  cafe  you  find  it  to  be  good  to  handel 
thefe  blacks  in  that  manner,  we  defire  and  require  you 
hereby  lovingly,  that  you  may  inform  us  herein, 
which  at  this  time  never  was  done,  viz.,  that  Chris 
tians  have  fuch  a  liberty  to  do  fo.  To  the  end  we 
mall  be  fatisfied  on  this  point,  and  fatisfy  likewife  our 
good  friends  and  acquaintances  in  our  native  country, 
to  whom  it  is  a  terror,  or  fearful  thing,  that  men 
mould  be  handelled  fo  in  Pennfylvania. 

"  This  is  from  our  meeting  at  Germantown,  held 
ye  1 8th  of  the  id  month,  1688,  to  be  delivered  to  the 
monthly  meeting  at  Richard  Worrell's. 

cc  GARRET  HENDERICH, 
DERICK  OP  DE  GRAEFF, 
FRANCIS  DANIEL  PASTORIUS, 
ABRAM  OP  DE  GRAEFF. 

"  At  our  monthly  meeting,  at  Dublin,  ye  joth  2d 
mo.,  1688,  we  having  infpected  ye  matter,  above  men 
tioned,  and  confidered  of  it,  we  find  it  fo  weighty  that 
we  think  it  not  expedient  for  us  to  meddle  with  it 
here,  but  do  rather  commit  it  to  ye  confideration  of  ye 
quarterly  meeting ;  ye  tenor  of  it  being  related  to  ye 
truth. 

"On  behalf  of  ye  monthly  meeting, 

"Jo.  HART. 

"  This  abovementioned,  was  read  in  our  quarterly 
meeting,  at  Philadelphia,  the  4th  of  ye  4th  mo.,  '88, 
and  was  from  thence  recommended  to  the  yearly  meet 
ing,  and  the  above  faid  Derrick,  and  the  other  two 
mentioned  therein,  to  prefent  the  fame  to  ye  above 


78  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

faid  meeting,  it  being  a  thing  of  too  great  weight  for 
this  meeting  to  determine. 

cc  Signed  by  order  of  ye  meeting. 

cc  ANTHONY  MORRIS." 

The  minutes  o/ the  Yearly  Meeting,  held  at  Bur 
lington  in  the  fame  year,  record  the  refult  of  this  firft 
effort  among  the  Quakers. 


cc 


At  a  Yearly  Meeting,  held  at  Burlington  the 
day  of  the  yth  Month,  1688. 

cc  A  paper  being  here  prefented  by  fome  German 
Friends  Concerning  the  Lawfulnefs  &  Unlawfulnefs 
of  Buying  &  Keeping  of  Negroes  It  was  adjudged 
not  to  be  fo  proper  for  this  Meeting  to  give  a  Pofitive 
Judgment  in  the  Cafe  It  having  fo  general  a  Rela 
tion  to  many  other  Parts  &  therefore  at  prefent  they 
Forbear  It."  ExtracJ  from  the  Original  Minutes, 
copied  by  Nathan  Kite.  Compare  Bettle,  in  Penn.  Hift. 
Soc.  Coll.,  i.,  365. 

Richard  Baxter  has  been  reprefented  as  having 
cc  echoed  the  opinions  of  Puritan  Maflachufetts." 
Bancroft,  in.,  412.  We  have  already  mown  that  the 
Puritans  of  Maflachufetts  were  not  hoftile  to  flavery. 
Neither  was  Baxter ;  for  he  expreflly  recognized  the 
lawfulnefs  of  the  purchafe  and  ufe  of  men  as  flaves, 
although  he  denounced  man-ftealing  as  piracy.  The 
principal  point  of  his  Chriftian  Directory  (publifhed 
in  1673)  in  this  matter,  was  concerning  the  religious 
obligations  growing  out  of  the  relation  of  matter  and 
flave.  Works,  iv.,  212-20.,  xvn.,  330.,  xix.,  210. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  79 

Morgan  Godwyn,  a  clergyman  of  the  Church  of 
England,  who  wrote  and  publifhed  in  1680  "The 
Negro's  and  Indian's  Advocate,  fuing  for  their  Ad- 
miiTion  into  the  Church,"  etc.,  hardly  intimates  a 
doubt  of  the  lawfulnefs  of  their  flavery,  while  he 
pleads  for  their  humanity  and  right  to  religion  againft 
a  very  general  opinion  of  that  day,  which  denied  them 
both. 

Dean  Berkeley,  in  his  famous  fermon  before  the 
Venerable  Society  in  1731,  fpeaks  of  "the  irrational 
contempt  of  the  Blacks,  as  Creatures  of  another  Spe 
cies,  who  had  no  right  to  be  inftructed  or  admitted  to 
the  Sacraments."  Sermon,  p.  19. 

And  George  Keith  (then  Quaker),  whose  paper 
againft  the  practice  was  faid  to  be  given  forth  by  the 
appointment  of  the  meeting  held  by  him  in  the  city 
of  Philadelphia,  about  the  year  1693,  gave  a  ftrict 
charge  to  Friends  "  that  they  mould  fet  their  negroes 
at  liberty,  after  fome  reafonable  time  offervice."  Gabriel 
Thomas's  Hiftory  of  Pennfylvania,  etc.,  1698,^.  53,  54. 
This  was  probably  the  pamphlet  quoted  by  Dr.  Frank 
lin  in  his  letter  to  John  Wright,  4th  November,  1789. 
Works ,  x.,  403. 

Keith  appears  fimply  to  have  repeated  the  words 
of  George  Fox  in  Barbadoes  in  1671,  when  he  urged 
the  religious  training  of  the  negroes,  as  well  as  kind 
treatment,  in  place  of  <c  cruelty  towards  them,  as  the 
manner  of  fome  hath  been  and  is  ;  and  that  after 
certain  years  of  fervitude  they  mould  make  them 
free."  Journal^  n.,  140.  For  a  more  particular 
account  of  this  teftimony  of  Fox,  see  The  Friend, 
Vol.  xvn.,  pp.  28,  29.  4to.  Phil.  1843.  Tne  explicit 


8o  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 

anfwer  of  Fox  to  the  charge  that  the  Quakers  "  taught 
the  negroes  to  rebel,"  fhows  very  clearly  that  anti- 
flavery  doctrines  were  no  part  of  the  Quaker  creed  at 
that  time.  Ibid.,  pp.  147~9>  Compare  454.  See  aljo 
Ralph  Sandifora" s  Brief  Examination,  etc.,  Preface. 

And  for  half  a  century  afterwards  "  that  people 
were  as  greedy  as  any  Body  in  keeping  Negroes  for 
their  Gain,"  fo  as  to  induce  the  belief  that  they  "  ap 
proved  of  it  as  a  People  with  one  confent  unani- 
moufly."  Lay,  84.  Ralph  Sandiford,  in  1729,  in  his 
cc  Brief  Examination,"  etc.,  thus  bemoaned  the  fact, 
"that  it  hath  defaced  the  prefent  Difpenfation." 

cc  Had  the  Friends  flood  clear  of  this  Practice, 
that  it  might  have  been  anfwered  to  the  Traders  in 
Slaves  that  there  is  a  People  called  Quakers  in  Penn- 
fylvania  that  will  not  own  this  practice  in  Word  or 
Deed,  then  would  they  have  been  a  burning  and  a 
mining  Light  to  thefe  poor  Heathen,  and  a  Precedent 
to  the  Nations  throughout  the  Univerfe  which  might 
have  brought  them  to  have  feen  the  Evil  of  it  in 
themfelves,  and  glorifyed  the  Lord  on  our  Behalf, 
and  like  the  Queen  of  the  Eafty  to  have  admired  the 
Glory  and  Beauty  of  the  Church  of  God.  But  in- 
ftead  thereof,  the  tender  feed  in  the  Honeft-hearted  is 
under  Suffering,  to  fee  both  Elders  and  Ministers  as 
it  were  cloathed  with  it,  and  their  offspring  after  them 
filling  up  the  Meafure  of  their  Parents'  Iniquity ; 
which  may  be  fuffered  till  fuch  Time  that  Recompence 
from  Him  that  is  juft  to  all  his  Creatures  opens  that 
Eye  the  god  of  this  World  has  blinded.  Though  I 
would  not  be  underftood  to  pervert  the  Order  of  the 
Body,  which  confifts  of  Servants  and  Matters,  and  the 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  81 

Head  cannot  fay  to  the  Foot,  /  have  no  need  of  thee  ; 
but  it  is  the  Converting  Men's  Liberty  to  our  Wills, 
who  have  not,  like  the  Gibeonites,  offered  themfelves 
willingly,  or  by  Confent  given  their  Ear  to  the  Door- 
poft,  but  are  made  fuch  by  Force,  in  that  Nature  that 
defires  to  Lord  it  over  their  Fellow  Creatures,  is  what 
is  to  be  abhorred  by  all  Chriftians."  pp.  9,  10. 

Again,  he  fays  in  another  place :  "  But  in  Time 
this  dark  Trade  creeping  in  amongft  us  to  the  very 
Miniftry,  becaufe  of  the  profit  by  it,  hath  fpread  over 
others  like  a  Leprofy,  to  the  Grief  of  the  Honeft- 
hearted."  Preface. 

Public  fentiment  and  opinion  againft  flavery  were 
firft  aroufed  and  ftimulated  in  America  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  feventeenth  century  by  fympathy  for  the 
Chriftian  captives,  Dutch  and  Englim,  who  were  en- 
flaved  by  the  Turks  and  the  pirates  of  Northern 
Africa.  Lay's  "All  Slave-keepers  Apoftates."  The 
efforts  to  ranfom  and  releafe  thefe  unfortunate  perfons, 
excited  by  the  terrible  forrow  of  relatives  and  friends, 
kinfmen  and  countrymen,  brought  home  to  fome 
minds  (though  few)  the  injuftice  of  their  own  dealings 
with  the  negroes.  The  earlieft  writers  againft  flavery 
urged  that  argument  with  peculiar  force  and  unction, 
but  with  little  effect.  They  feem  to  have  made  no 
impreflion  on  the  legiflation  of  the  colonies,  and 
curious  and  zealous  refearch  only  can  recover  the 
memorials  of  their  righteous  teftimonies. 

The  earlieft  pofitive  public  challenge  to  flavery  in 

Maflachufetts  of  which  we  have  any  knowledge,  was 

in  the  year  1700,  when  a  learned,  pious,  and  honored 

magiftrate  entered  the   lifts   alone,   and  founded  his 

6 


82  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

folitary  blafl  in  the  ears  of  his  brother  magiftrates  and 
the  people,  who  liftened  in  amazement  and  wonder, 
not  unmingled  with  forrow  and  contempt.  His  per 
formance  is  all  the  more  remarkable  from  the  fact 
that  it  ftands  out  in  the  hiftory  of  the  time  feparate  and 
diflinct  as  "  the  voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wildernefs." 

SAMUEL  SEWALL,  at  that  time  a  Judge  of  the 
Superior  Court,  and  afterwards  Chief-Juftice,  pub- 
limed  a  brief  tract  in  1700,  entitled  :  cc  The  Selling  of 
Jqfeph  a  Memorial"  It  filled  three  pages  of  a  folio 
meet,  ending  with  the  imprint :  c<  Eofton  of  the  Maffa- 
chujetts ;  Printed  by  Bartholomew  Green  and  John  Allen. 
June  ztfhy  1700." 

The  author  prefented  a  copy  of  this  tract  "  not 
only  to  each  member  of  the  General  Court  at  the  time 
of  its  publication,  but  alfo  to  numerous  clergymen 
and  literary  gentlemen  with  whom  he  was  intimate." 
MS.  Letter.  Compare  BriJJToty  i.,  224.  Although  thus 
extenfively  circulated  at  that  day,  it  has  for  many 
years  been  known  apparently  only  by  tradition,  as 
nearly  all  the  notices  of  it  which  we  have  feen  are  con 
fined  to  the  fact  of  its  publication  early  in  the  eight 
eenth  century,  the  date  being  nowhere  correctly  ftated. 

Beyond  this,  it  appears  to  have  been  unknown  to 
our  hiftorians,  and  is  now  reproduced  probably  for 
the  firft  time  in  the  prefent  century.  Indeed,  we  have 
met  with  no  quotation  even  from  it  later  than  1738, 
when  it  was  reprinted  in  Pennfylvania,  where  anti- 
flavery  took  an  earlier  and  deeper  root,  and  bore 
earlier  fruit,  than  in  any  other  part  of  America.1 

1  It  was  reprinted  as  a  part  of  Benjamin  Lay's  trail,  "  All  Slave-Keepers 
that  keep  the  Innocent  in  Bondage,  Apoftates      .      .     ,"  in  which  it  occupies 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  83 

Its  rarity  and  peculiar  interefl  will  juftify  us  in 
placing  the  reprint  before  our  readers  in  this  con 
nection.  It  is  fomewhat  remarkable  that  fo  fignal  a 
teftimony  againfl  flavery  fhould  have  efcaped  the  re- 
fearch  of  thofe  who  have  in  their  cuftody  "  the  hiftoric 
fame"  of  Maflachufetts.  It  is  a  moft  honorable  me 
morial  of  its  venerated  author. 

"  THE  SELLING  OF  JOSEPH  A  MEMORIAL. 
By  the  Hon'ble  JUDGE  SEWALL  in  New  England. 

"  FORASMUCH  as  LIBERTY  is  in  real  value  next  unto  Life ; 
None  ought  to  part  with  it  themjelvcs,  or  deprive  others  of  it,  but 
upon  mojl  mature  confederation. 

"  The  Numeroufnefs  of  Slaves  at  this  Day  in  the  Province,  and  the 
Uneafinefs  of  them  under  their  Slavery,  hath  put  many  upon  thinking 
whether  the  Foundation  of  it  be  firmly  and  well  laid ;  fo  as  to  fuftain 
the  Vaft  Weight  that  is  built  upon  it.  It  is  moft  certain  that  all  Men, 
as  they  are  the  Sons  of  Adam,  are  Co-heirs,  and  have  equal  Right  unto 
Liberty,  and  all  other  outward  Comforts  of  Life.  GOD  hath  given  the 
Earth  [with  all  its  commodities]  unto  the  Sons  of  Adam,  PfaL,  115, 
1 6.  And  hath  made  of  one  Blood  all  Nations  of  Men,  for  to  dwell 
on  all  the  face  of  the  Earth,  and  hath  determined  the  Times  before 
appointed,  and  the  bounds  of  their  Habitation :  That  they  Jhould 
feek  the  Lord.  Forafmuch  then  as  we  are  the  Offspring  of  GOD, 
&c.  Ads  17.  26,  27,  29.  Now,  although  the  Title  given  by  the  laft 
ADAM  doth  infinitely  better  Men's  Eftates,  refpefting  GOD  and  them- 
felves ;  and  grants  them  a  moft  beneficial  and  inviolable  Leafe  under 
the  Broad  Seal  of  Heaven,  who  were  before  only  Tenants  at  Will ; 
yet  through  the  Indulgence  of  GOD  to  our  Firft  Parents  after  the  Fall, 
the  outward  Eftate  of  all  and  every  of  their  Children,  remains  the 

pp.  199-207  inclufive.  The  title  of  Lay's  traft  gives  the  imprint,  "  Phila 
delphia,  Printed  for  the  Author,  1737  5"  but  it  was  not  published  until  the 
following  year.  See  The  American  Weekly  Mercury,  No.  973,  Aug.  17-24, 
1 73 8,  and  following  numbers  ;  efpeciallyNo.  982,  Oft.  19-26,  1738,  in  which 
is  printed  the  repudiation  of  Lay  and  his  book,  by  the  Yearly  Meeting. 


84  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

fame  as  to  one  another.  So  that  Originally,  and  Naturally,  there  is  no 
fuch  thing  as  Slavery.  Jofeph  was  rightfully  no  more  a  Slave  to  his 
Brethren,  than  they  were  to  him ;  and  they  had  no  more  Authority  to 
Sell  him,  than  they  had  to  Slay  him.  And  if  they  had  nothing  to  do  to 
fell  him ;  the  I/hmaelites  bargaining  with  them,  and  paying  down 
Twenty  pieces  of  Silver,  could  not  make  a  Title.  Neither  could 
PotipJiar  have  any  better  Intereft  in  him  than  the  I/hmaelites  had. 
Gen.  37,  20,  27,  28.  For  he  that  mall  in  this  cafe  plead  Alteration 
of  Property,  feems  to  have  forfeited  a  great  part  of  his  own  claim  to 
Humanity.  There  is  no  proportion  between  Twenty  Pieces  of  Silver 
and  LIBERTY.  The  Commodity  itfelf  is  the  Claimer.  If  Arabian 
Gold  be  imported  in  any  quantities,  moft  are  afraid  to  meddle  with  it^ 
though  they  might  have  itateafy  rates ;  left  it  mould  have  been  wrong 
fully  taken  from  the  Owners,  it  mould  kindle  a  fire  to  the  Confumption 
of  their  whole  Eft  ate,  'Tis  pity  there  mould  be  more  Caution  ufed  in 
buying  a  Horfe,  or  a  little  lifelefs  duft,  than  there  is  in  purchafmg 
Men  and  Women :  Whereas  they  are  the  Offspring  of  GOD,  and  their 
Liberty  is, 

Auro  pretlojior  Omni. 

"  And  feeing  GOD  hath  faid,  He  that  Stealetha  Man,  and  Selleth 
kirn,  or  if  he  be  found  in  his  Hand,  hejhall  furely  be  put  to  Death. 
Exod.  21,  1 6.  This  Law  being  of  Everlafting  Equity,  wherein  Man- 
Stealing  is  ranked  among  the  moft  atrocious  of  Capital  Crimes :  What 
louder  Cry  can  there  be  made  of  that  Celebrated  Warning, 

Caveat  Emptor! 

"  And  all  things  confidered,  it  would  conduce  more  to  the  Welfare 
of  the  Province,  to  have  White  Servants  for  a  Term  of  Years,  than  to 
have  Slaves  for  Life.  Few  can  endure  to  hear  of  a  Negro's  being 
made  free ;  and  indeed  they  can  feldom  ufe  their  Freedom  well ;  yet 
their  continual  afpiring  after  their  forbidden  Liberty,  renders  them 
Unwilling  Servants.  And  there  is  fuch  a  difparity  in  their  Conditions, 
Colour,  and  Hair,  that  they  can  never  embody  with  us,  &  grow  up  in 
orderly  Families,  to  the  Peopling  of  the  Land ;  but  ftill  remain  in  our 
Body  Politick  as  a  kind  of  extravafat  Blood.  As  many  Negro  Men 
as  there  are  among  us,  fo  many  empty  Places  are  there  in  our  Train 
Bands,  and  the  places  taken  up  of  Men  that  might  make  Hufbands  for 
our  Daughters.  And  the  Sons  and  Daughters  of  New  England  would 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  85 

become  more  like  Jacob  and  Rachel,  if  this  Slavery  were  thruft  quite 
out  of  Doors.  Moreover  it  is  too  well  known  what  Temptations 
Matters  are  under,  to  connive  at  the  Fornication  of  their  Slaves ;  left 
they  mould  be  obliged  to  find  them  Wives,  or  pay  their  Fines.  It 
feems  to  be  practically  pleaded  that  they  might  be  lawlefs ;  'tis  thought 
much  of,  that  the  Law  mould  have  fatisfaclion  for  their  Thefts,  and 
other  Immoralities ;  by  which  means,  Holinefs  to  the  Lord  is  more 
rarely  engraven  upon  this  fort  of  Servitude.  It  is  likewife  moll 
lamentable  to  think,  how  in  taking  Negroes  out  of  Africa,  and  felling 
of  them  here,  That  which  GOD  has  joined  together,  Men  do  boldly  rend 
afunder ;  Men  from  their  Country,  Hulbands  from  their  Wives,  Parents 
from  their  Children.  How  horrible  is  the  Uncleannefs,  Mortality,  if 
not  Murder,  that  the  Ships  are  guilty  of  that  bring  great  Crouds  of 
thefe  miferable  Men  and  Women.  Methinks  when  we  are  bemoaning 
the  barbarous  Ufage  of  our  Friends  and  Kinsfolk  in  Africa,  it  might 
not  be  unreafonable  to  enquire  whether  we  are  not  culpable  in  forcing 
the  Africans  to  become  Slaves  amongft  ourfelves.  And  it  may  be  a 
queftion  whether  all  the  Benefit  received  by  Negro  Slaves  will  balance 
the  Accompt  of  Cam  laid  out  upon  them ;  and  for  the  Redemption 
of  our  own  enflaved  Friends  out  of  Africa.  Befidesall  the  Perfons  and 
Eftates  that  have  periihed  there. 

"  Obj.  i.  Thefe  Blackamores  are  of  the  Poflerity  of  Cham,  and 
therefore  are  under  the  Curfe  of  Slavery.  Gen.  9,  25,  26,  27. 

"  Anf.  Of  all  Offices,  one  would  not  beg  this ;  viz.  Uncall'd  for, 
to  be  an  Executioner  of  the  Vindictive  Wrath  of  God  ;  the  extent  and 
duration  of  which  is  to  us  uncertain.  If  this  ever  was  a  Commiffion  ; 
How  do  we  know  but  that  it  is  long  fince  out  of  Date  ?  Many  have 
found  it  to  their  Coft,  that  a  Prophetical  Denunciation  of  Judgment 
againft  a  Perfon  or  People,  would  not  warrant  them  to  inflict  that  evil. 
If  it  would,  Hazael  might  juftify  himfelf  in  all  he  did  againft  his  mafter, 
and  the  Israelites  from  2  Kings  8,  10,  12. 

"  But  it  is  poffible  that  by  curfory  reading,  this  Text  may  have 
been  miftaken.  For  Canaan  is  the  Perfon  Curfed  three  times  over, 
without  the  mentioning  of  Cham.  Good  Expofitors  fuppofe  the  Curfe 
entailed  on  him,  and  that  this  Prophefie  was  accomplifhed  in  the  Ex 
tirpation  of  the  Canaanitcs,  and  in  the  Servitude  of  the  Gibeonites. 


86  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Vide  Pareum.  Whereas  the  Blackmores  are  not  defcended  of  Canaan, 
but  of  Ciifh.  Pfal.  68,  31.  Princes  JJiall  come  out  of  Egypt  [Miz- 
raim].  Ethiopia  [Cufh]  Jhall  foon  Jiretch  out  her  hands  unto  God. 
Under  which  Names,  all  Africa  may  be  comprehended ;  and  their 
Promifed  Converfion  ought  to  be  prayed  for.  Jer.  13,  23.  Can  the 
Ethiopian  change  his  Skin  ?  This  mows  that  Black  Men  are  the 
Pofterity  of  Ciifh.  Who  time  out  of  mind  have  been  diftinguimed  by 
their  Colour.  And  for  want  of  the  true,  Ovid  affigns  a  fabulous  caufe 
of  it. 

Sanguine  turn  credunt  in  corpora  summa  <vocato 
JEthiopum  populos  nigrum  traxtffe  color  em. 

Metamorph.  lib.  2. 

"  Obj.  2.  The  Nigers  are  brought  out  of  a  Pagan  Country, 
into  places  where  the  Gofpel  is  preached. 

"  Anf.  Evil  muft  not  be  done,  that  good  may  come  of  it.  The 
extraordinary  and  comprehenfive  Benefit  accruing  to  the  Church  of 
God,  and  to  Jojeph  perfonally,  did  not  rectify  his  Brethren's  Sale  of 
him. 

"  Obj.  3.  The  Africans  have  Wars  one  with  another :  Our 
Ships  bring  lawful  Captives  taken  in  thofe  wars. 

"  Anjiu.  For  aught  is  known,  their  Wars  are  much  fuch  as  were 
between  Jacob* s  Sons  and  their  Brother  jfofeph.  If  they  be  between 
Town  and  Town ;  Provincial  or  National :  Every  War  is  upon  one 
fide  Unjuft.  An  Unlawful  War  can't  make  lawful  Captives.  And  by 
receiving,  we  are  in  danger  to  promote,  and  partake  in  their  Barbarous 
Cruelties.  I  am  fure,  if  fome  Gentlemen  mould  go  down  to  the 
Brewflers  to  take  the  Air,  and  Fish  :  And  a  ftronger  Part}'  from  Hull 
mould  furprife  them,  and  fell  them  for  Slaves  to  a  Ship  outward  bound ; 
they  would  think  themfelves  unjuftly  dealt  with ;  both  by  Sellers  and 
Buyers.  And  yet  'tis  to  be  feared,  we  have  no  other  Kind  of  Title  to 
our  Nigers.  Therefore  all  things  whatsoever  ye  would  that  men 
JJiould  do  to  you,  do  you  even  fo  to  them :  for  this  is  the  Law  and 
the  Prophets.  Matt.  7,  12. 

'Obj.  4.  Abraham  had  Servants  bought  with  his  Money  and 
born  in  his  Houfe. 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  87 

"  Anf.  Until  the  Circumftances  of  Abraham's  purchafe  be  re 
corded,  no  Argument  can  be  drawn  from  it.  In  the  mean  time, 
Charity  obliges  us  to  conclude,  that  He  knew  it  was  lawful  and  good. 

"It  is  Obfervable  that  the  Israelites  were  ftriclily  forbidden  the 
buying  or  felling  one  another  for  Slaves.  Levit.  25.  39.  46.  Jer.  34. 
8-22.  And  GOD  gaged  His  Bleffing  in  lieu  of  any  lofs  they  might 
conceit  they  fuffered  thereby,  Deut.  15.  18.  And  fince  the  partition 
Wall  is  broken  down,  inordinate  Self-love  mould  likewife  be  demolifhed. 
GOD  expects  that  Chriftians  mould  be  of  a  more  Ingenuous  and  benign 
frame  of  Spirit.  Chriftians  mould  carry  it  to  all  the  World,  as  the 
Israelites  were  to  carry  it  one  towards  another.  And  for  Men 
obftinately  to  perfift  in  holding  their  Neighbours  and  Brethren  under 
the  Rigor  of  perpetual  Bondage,  feems  to  be  no  proper  way  of  gaining 
Aflurance  that  God  has  given  them  Spiritual  Freedom.  Our  Blefled 
Saviour  has  altered  the  Meafures  of  the  ancient  Love  Song,  and  fet  it 
to  a  molt  Excellent  New  Tune,  which  all  ought  to  be  ambitious  of 
Learning,  Matt.  5.  43.  44.  John  13.  34.  Thefe  Ethiopians,  as 
black  as  they  are,  feeing  they  are  the  Sons  and  Daughters  of  the  Firft 
Adam,  the  Brethren  and  Sifters  of  the  Laft  ADAM,  and  the  Offspring 
of  GOD  ;  They  ought  to  be  treated  with  a  Refpecl:  agreeable. 

"  Servitus  perfe&a  voluntaria,  inter  Chriftianum  &  Chriftianum, 
ex  parte  fervi  patientis  Jape  eft  licita,  quia  eft  necejfaria ;  fed  ex 
parte  domini  agentis,  &  procurando  &  exercendo,  vix  poteft  effe 
licita ;  quia  non  convenit  regular  illi  generali :  Qucecunque  volueritis 
utfadant  vobis  homines,  ita  &  vosjacite  eis.  Matt.  7.  12. 

"  Perjeda  Jervitus  pctncz,  non  poteft  jure  locum  habere,  ni/i  ex 
delido  gravi  quod  ultimum  Jupplicium  aliquo  modo  meretur :  quia 
Libertas  ex  naturali  aftimatione  proxime  accedit  ad  vitam  ipjam^  & 
eidem  a  multis  prczferrifolet. 

"  Ames.  Cas.  Confc.  Lib.  5.  Cap.  23.     Thes.  2.  3." 

Thus  fignally  and  clearly  did  Judge  Sewall  expofe 
the  miferable  pretences  on  which  flavery  and  the  flave- 
trade  were  then  juftified  in  Maflachufetts,  as  they  con 
tinued  to  be  long  years  after  he  "  flept  with  his 
fathers."  And  he  exhibited  in  his  correfpondence  his 
defire  that  cc  the  wicked  practice  of  flavery  "  might  be 


88  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

taken  away,  as  well  as  his  ftrong  conviction  that  there 
would  be  "  no  great  progrefs  in  Gofpellizing  till 
then."  Letter  to  Henry  Newman,  Dec. — Jan.,  1714-15. 
It  is  manifefl  that  he  was  far  in  advance  of  his  day  and 
generation  in  thefe  views,  and  he  has  himfelf  left  the 
record  that  he  met  more  cc  frowns  and  hard  words  " 
than  fympathy !  His  teftimony  did  not  go  unchal 
lenged,  nor  was  its  publication  allowed  to  pafs  with 
out  reply.  JOHN  SAFFIN,  a  judge  of  the  fame  court 
with  Judge  Sewall,  and  a  flaveholder,  printed  an  an- 
fwer  the  next  year,  of  which  we  regret  to  fay  we 
have  been  able  to  find  no  copy.  Could  it  be  found, 
it  would  undoubtedly  be  an  interefling  document  and 
very  important  in  illustration  of  the  hiftory  of  flavery 
in  Maflachufetts.  We  might  naturally  expect  to  find 
in  it  fome  references  to  the  laws,  the  principles,  and 
the  practices  of  the  Puritan  Fathers  of  that  colony.1 

*  Since  this  portion  of  our  work  was  firft  printed,  in  the  Hiftorical 
Magazine  for  June,  1864,  Sewall's  tracl  has  been  reprinted  by  the  Mafla- 
chufetts  Hiftorical  Society,  from  an  original  prefented  to  its  Library  by  the 
Hon.  Robert  C.  Winthrop.  Proc.  M.  H.  S.,  1863-64,  pp.  161-5.  And, 
what  is  of  much  more  importance  in  this  connexion,  a  copy  of  Saffin's 
anfwer  has  been  difcovered.  It  is  a  fmall  quarto,  entitled  "  A  |  Brief  and 
Candid  Anfwer  to  a  late  j  Printed  Sheet  entituled  |  THE  SELLING  OF 
JOSEPH  |  whereunto  is  annexed,  j  a  True  and  Particular  Narrative  by 
way  of  Vindication  of  the  |  Author's  Dealing  with  and  Profecution  of  his 
Negro  Man  Servant  |  for  his  vile  and  exhorbitant  Behaviour  towards  his 
Mafter  and  his  |  Tenant,  Thomas  Shepard  ;  which  hath  been  wrongfully 
reprefented  [  to  their  Prejudice  and  Defamation,  j  By  JOHN  SAFFIN,  Efqr. : 
Bofton:  Printed  in  the  Year  1701."  The  original  is  now  in  the  pos- 
feflion  of  GEORGE  BRINLEY,  Efq.,  of  Hartford,  Conn.  We  are  indebted  to 
the  refearch  and  fagacity  of  Mr.  J.  HAMMOND  TRUMBULL,  Prefident  of 
the  Connecticut  Hiftorical  Society,  for  the  difcovery  of  Saffin's  traft  and  per- 
mifiion  to  make  the  prefent  ufe  of  it.  Saffin's  original  petitions  to  the 
General  Court  in  regard  to  this  affair,  one  referring  to  his  pamphlet  as  in 
print,  etc.,  etc., are  preferved  in  the  Mafs.  Archives,  ix.,  152,  153. 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  89 

The   following  letter   from  Judge  Sewall,  which 
illuftrates  the  fubject  further,  was  addrefled 

"  To  the  Revd.  &  aged  Mr.  John  Higginfon. 

Apr.  13,  1706. 

"  Sir, 

"  I  account  it  a  great  Favour  of  God,  that  I  have 
been  priviledged  with  the  Acquaintance  and  Friend- 
fhip  of  many  of  the  Firft  Planters  in  New  England : 
and  the  Friendfhip  of  your  felf,  as  fuch,  has  particu 
larly  oblig'd  me.  //  is  now  near  Six  years  agoe  since  I 
printed  a  Sheet  in  defence  of  Liberty.  The  next  year 
after,  Mr.  Saffin  Jet  forth  a  -printed  Anjwer.  I  forbore 
troubling  the  Province  with  any  Reply,  untill  I  Jaw  a 
very  Severe  Aft  pajfling  againft  Indians  and  Negros,  and 
then  I  Reprinted  that  Queftion,  as  I  found  it  ftated  and 
anjwered  in  the  Athenian  Oracle  ;  which  I  knew  nothing 
of  before  laft  Autumn  was  twelve  moneths,  when  I  acci 
dentally  cafl  my  Eye  upon  it.  Amidft  the  Frowns  and 
hard  Words  I  have  met  with  for  this  Undertaking,  it  is 
no  Jmall  refrejhment  to  me,  that  I  have  the  Learned, 
Reverend  &?  Aged  Mr.  Higginfon  for  my  Abetter.  By 
the  interpojition  of  this  Br eft-Work,  I  hope  to  carry  on  and 
manage  this  Enterprife  with  Safety  and  Succejs.  I  have 
inclofed  the  Prints.  I  could  be  glad  of  your  Anfwer 
to  one  Cafe  much  in  agitation  among  us  at  this  day  : 
viz.,  Whether  it  be  not  for  the  Honor  of  G.  and  of 
N.  E.  to  referve  entire  and  untouch'd  the  Indian 
Plantation  of  Natick,  and  other  Lands  under  the 
fame  Circumftances  ?  that  the  lying  of  those  Lands 
unoccupied  and  undefired  by  the  Englifh,  may  be  a 
valid  and  Lafting  Evidence,  that  we  defire  the  Con- 


|   UNIVERSITY 

v 


90  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

verfion  and  Wellfare  of  the  Natives,  and  would  by  no 
means  Extirpat  them,  as  the  Spaniards  did  ?  There 
is  one  thing  more  I  would  mention,  and  that  is,  I  am 
verily  perswaded  that  the  Set  time  for  the  Drying  up 
of  the  Apocalyptical  Euphrates,  is  very  nigh5  if  not 
come :  and  I  earneftly  befpeak  the  Afliftance  of  your 
Prayers  in  that  momentous  Concern :  wch  I  do  with 
the  more  Confidence,  becaufe  you  were  Lifted  in  that 
Service  above  fifty  years  ago.  Pray,  Sir  !  Come 
afrefh  into  the  Confederation.  Let  me  alfo  entreat 
your  Prayers  for  me,  and  my  family,  that  the  BlerTmg 
of  G.  may  reft  upon  the  head  of  every  one  in  it  by 
reafon  of  the  good  will  of  Him  who  dwell'd  in  the 
Bum.  My  fervice  to  Madam  Higginfon.  I  am,  Sir, 

cc  Your  humble  Serv*. 

CC  C      C   " 

O.    i^-. 

We  are  unable  to  give  any  account  of  the  Act 
againft  Indians  and  Negroes,  whofe  feverity  induced 
Sewall  to  renew  his  efforts  in  their  behalf.  Thefe 
efforts  were  probably  fuccefsful,  as  none  appears  to 
have  been  pafTed  into  a  law  at  all  anfwering  to  his 
defcription  in  its  provifions,  and  in  point  of  time ;  or 
if  paffed,  it  muft  have  been  fpeedily  repealed.  If  the 
Act  referred  to  mould  be  found,  it  might  furnifh  a 
ftriking  illuftration  of  the  views  of  the  time  concern 
ing  the  ftatus  of  thefe  unhappy  races  of  men. 

We  mall  therefore  re-produce  here  "that  Ques 
tion"  as  cc  ftated  and  anfwered  in  the  Athenian  Oracle," 
which  Sewall  ufed  to  fo  good  purpofe  in  defending  the 
rights  of  Indians  and  Negroes  againft  the  hoftile  legis 
lation  of  MafTachufetts,  in  the  early  years  of  the 
eighteenth  century. 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  91 


From  the  Athenian  Oracle,  Vol.  n.,  pp.  460-63. 

"  Q"  We  read  in  Gen.  17.  12:  And  he  that  is  eight  days  old 
{hall  be  Circumcifed  among  you,  every  Man-child  in  their  Generation. 
He  that  is  born  in  the  Houfe,  or  bought  with  Money  of  any  Stranger 
that  is  not  of  thy  Seed.  This  was  God's  Covenant  with  Abraham, 
and  in  him  with  all  the  Jews ;  which  Covenant  by  Chri/Ps  coming 
into  the  World,  being  aboli/hed,  and  the  Covenant  of  Baptifm  infti- 
tuted  in  its  Jlead ;  The  Queftion  is,  Whether  thofe  Merchants  and 
Planters  in  the  Weft  Indies,  as  well  all  other  parts  of  the  World, 
that  buy  Negroes,  or  other  Heathen  Servants  or  Slaves,  are  not  in- 
difpenfably  bound  to  bring  fuch  Servants  to  be  Baptized,  as  well  as 
Abraham  was  to  Circumcife  his  Stranger  Servants  ?  Confequently, 
whafs  to  be  thought  of  thofe  Chriftian  Mqflers,  who  refufe  to  let 
fuch  Servants  be  baptized ;  becaufe  if  they  were,  they  wou'd  have 
their  freedom  at  a  certain  term  of  Years  allowed  by  the  Laws  of  the 
fever al  Plantations  ? 

"  A.  We  have  met  with  this  Queftion  before,  though  to  comply 
with  the  Gentleman's  defire,  we'll  here  give  it  a  larger  Anfwer ;  tho* 
in  the  firft  Place,  we  muft  obferve  a  falfe  fuppofition  in  the  wording  of 
it.  That  God's  Covenant  with  Abraham  was  aboliihedby  the  Covenant 
he  made  with  us  by  our  Saviour,  and  confequently  they  are  two 
different  Covenants  ;  whereas  they  were  rather  the  fame  Covenant, 
with  two  different  Seals  ;  we  fay  the  Covenant  God  made  with  Abra 
ham,  was  not  a  Covenant  of  Works,  but  of  Faith,  as  well  as  that  he 
makes  by  Chrift  with  all  Believers ;  nay,  was  the  very  fame  with  it, 
Chrift  being  promifed  in  God's  Covenant  with  Abraham,  when  'twas 
faid,  That  in  his  feed Jliould  all  the  Nations  of  the  Earth  be  blejfed ; 
which  is  interpreted  of  Chrift  by  the  infpired  Writers ;  and  this  is 
further  evident  from  the  Apoftles  way  of  Arguing,  Rom.  4.  n.  13. 
He  received  the  Sign  of  Circumcifion,  a  Seal  of  the  Righteoufnefs 
of  the  Faith,  which  he  had  yet  being  uncircumcifed,  that  he  might  be 
Father  of  all  them  that  believe,  though  they  be  not  Circumcifed ; 
for  the  Promife  that  hejhould  be  the  Heir  of  the  World,  was  not  to 
Abraham,  or  to  his  feed  through  the  Law  ;  but  through  Faith,  etc. 

"  Now  to  the  Queftion.  If  Abraham  was  oblig'd  to  Circumcife 
all  that  were  born  of  his  Houfe,  and  that  were  bought  with  money  of 


92  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 


the  Stranger  (the  Samaritan  Verfion  has  it  <T3?*i5  Barbarak,  whence 
Bap/fopos  a  Barbarian,  names  that  all  Nations  have  ever  fmce  flung  at 
one  another,  and  the  Hebrews  as  often  call'd  by  it  among  the  Greeks 
as  any.  If  he  was  to  do  this,  ought  not  all  Chriftians  by  Parity  of 
Reafon  to  do  the  like  by  their  Slaves  and  Servants  ?  We  anfwer, 
Yes,  and  much  more,  as  the  Go/pel  is  now  more  clearly  revealed  than 
'twas  to  Abraham,  who  indeed  faw  Chrift,  and  rejoic'd,  but  'twas  in 
darker  Types  and  Prophecies.  But  in  order  to  a  more  full  fatisfac- 
tion  of  this  Difficulty,  it  may  be  further  convenient  to  enquire;  whe 
ther  Negro's  Children  are  to  be  Baptized,  and  for  grown  Perfons  what 
Preparation  is  required  of  'em  ?  To  the  firil,  a  great  Man  of  our 
Church  was  of  an  opinion,  That  a  Negro's  Child  ought  to  be  baptiz'd, 
as  well  as  any  others  ;  the  Promife  reaching  To  all  that  were  afar  off] 
as  well  as  to  Believers  and  their  Children,  and  in  this  cafe,  the  right 
of  the  child  is  in  the  Mafter,[i]  not  the  Slave  ;  and  if  Chrift  dy'd  for 
all,  why  mould  not  the  Vertues  of  his  Death  be  apply'd  to  all  ;  who  do 
nothing  to  refift  it,  for  the  warning  away  their  Original  Pravity? 
Again,  as  we  argue  in  the  cafe  of  Infant  Baptifm.  If  Infants  were  in 
the  Covenant  before  Chrift,  how  come  they  fmce  to  be  excluded  ?  So 
we  may  here,  and  perhaps  more  generally  ;  If  all  Infants,  born  in 
Abraham's  houfe,  or  bought  with  Money  of  the  Stranger  or  Barbarian 
(who  often  fold  their  own  Children  then,  as  they  do  now)  if  they  were 
then  to  have  the  Seal  of  the  Covenant,  how  have  they  fmce  forfeited 
it  r  Why  mayn't  they  be  capable  of  a  nobler  Seal,  'tis  true,  but  yet  of 
the  fame  Covenant  made  with  all  Mankind  by  Chrift,  that  promif'd 
Seed,  in  whom,  as  before,  all  Nations  mould  be  blefled,  and  the  breach 
repaired  that  was  made  in  Adam  ;  as  was,  we  are  fure,  the  exprefs 
opinion  of  St.  Jerom,  who  in  his  difputation  with  the  Pelagian, 
Ep.  17,  has  remarkable  Expreffions.  Why  are  Infants  Baptized, 
fays  the  Pelagian  ?  The  Orthodox  anfwers,  That  in  Baptifm  their 

[l  At  a  meeting  of  the  General  Aflbciation  of  the  Colony  of  Conne£H- 
cut,  1738,  "  It  was  inquired  —  whether  the  infant  flaves  of  Chriftian  matters 
may  be  baptized  in  the  right  of  their  mafters  —  they  folemnly  promifing  to 
train  them  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord  :  and  whether  it  is  the 
duty  of  fuch  mafters  to  offer  fuch  children  and  thus  religioufly  to  promife. 
Both  queftions  were  affirmatively  anfwered.  Records  as  reported  by  Re<v. 
C.  Chapin,  D.  D.,  quoted  in  Joneses  Religious  Injlruftion  of  the  Negroes,  etc.y 

A  34-] 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  93 

Sins  may  be  remitted.  The  Pelagian  replies,  Where  did  they  ever 
fin  ?  The  Orthodox  rejoyns,  that  S.  Paul  ihall  anfwer  for  him,  who 
fays  in  the  fifth  of  the  Rom.,  Death  reign'd  from  Adam  to  Mofes, 
even  over  thofe  who  had  notjihrtd,  according  to  the  Jimilitude  of 
Adam's  Tranfgreffion.  And  he  quotes  St.  Cyprian  in  the  fame  place, 
both  to  his  and  our  Purpofe,  That  if  Remiffion  of  Sins  is  given  even 
to  greater  and  more  notorious  Sinners,  and  none  is  Excepted  from 
Grace,  none  prohibited  from  Baptifm,  much  lefs  ought  an  Infant  to 
be  deny'd  Baptifm,  who  has  no  Sin  of  his  own,  but  only  that  of  his 
Father  Adam  to  anfwer  for.  This  for  Children,  and  there's  yet  lefs 
doubt  of  thofe  who  are  of  Age  to  anfwer  for  themfelves,  and  would 
foon  learn  the  Principles  of  our  Faith,  and  might  be  taught  the  Obliga 
tion  of  the  Vow  they  made  in  Baptifm,  as  there's  little  doubt  but  Abra 
ham  inftrufted  his  Heathen  Servants,  who  were  of  Age  to  learn,  in 
the  Nature  of  Circumci/ion,  before  he  Circumcif'd  them  ;  nor  can  we 
conclude  much  lefs  from  God's  own  noble  Teftimony  of  him,  Gen.  18. 
19.  /  know  him,  that  he  will  command  his  Children  and  his 
Houfehold,  and  theyfhall  keep  the  way  of  the  Lord. 

"  What  then  mould  hinder  but  thefe  be  Baptized  ?  If  only  the 
Covetoufnefs  of  their  Matters,  who  for  fear  of  lofmg  their  Bodies,  will 
venture  their  Souls  ;  which  of  the  two  are  we  to  efteem  the  greater 
Heathens  ?  Now  that  this  is  notorious  Matter  of  Facl,  that  they  are 
fo  far  from  perfuading  thofe  poor  Creatures  to  Come  to  Baptifm, 
that  they  difcourage  them  from  it,  and  rather  hinder  them  as  much  as 
poffible,  though  many  of  the  wretches,  as  we  have  been  informed, 
earneftly  defire  it ;  this  we  believe,  none  that  are  concern'd  in  the 
Plantations,  if  they  are  ingenuous,  will  deny,  but  own  they  don't  at  all 
care  to  have  them  Baptized.  ^Talk  to  a  Planter  of  the  Soul  of  a 
Negro,  and  he'll  be  apt  to  tell  ye  (or  at  leaft  his  Actions  fpeak  it 
loudly)  that  the  Body  of  one  of  them  may  be  worth  twenty  Pounds ; 
but  the  Souls  of  an  hundred  of  them  would  not  yield  him  one 
Farthing ;  and  therefore  he's  not  at  all  felicitous  about  them,  though 
the  true  Reafon  is  indeed,  becaufe  of  that  Cuftom  of  giving  them  their 
Freedom  after  turning  Chriftians,  which  we  know  not  if  it  be  Reafon- 
able  ;  we  are  fure  the  Father  of  the  Faithful  did  not  fo  by  thofe  Ser 
vants  whom  he  had  Circumcifed.  'Tis  no  where  required  in  Scripture. 
St.  Paul  indeed  bids  Matters  not  be  cruel  and  unreafonable  to  their 
Slaves,  efpecially  if  Brethren  or  Chriftians ;  but  he  no  where  bids  them 


94  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

give  'em  their  Liberty,  nor  do's  Chriftianity  alter  any  Civil  Right  ;  nor 
do's  the  fame  Apoftle,  in  all  his  excellent  Plea  for  Onejimus,  once  tell 
his  Mafter  'tis  his  Duty  to  fet  him  Free. ;  all  he  defires  is,  he'd  again 
receive  and  forgive  him ;  nay,  he  tells  Servants,  'tis  their  Duty,  in 
whatever  ftate  they  are  call'd  therein  to  abide ;  befides,  fome  Perfons, 
nay,  Nations  feem  to  be  born  for  Slaves ;  particularly  many  of  the 
Barbarians  in  Africa,  who  have  been  fuch  almoft  from  the  beginning 
of  the  World,  and  who  are  in  a  much  better  Condition  of  Life,  when 
Slaves  among  us,  then  when  at  Liberty  at  Home,  to  cut  Throats  and 
Eat  one  another,  efpecially  when  by  the  Slavery  of  their  Bodies,  they 
are  brought  to  a  Capacity  of  Freeing  their  Souls  from  a  much  more 
unfupportable  Bondage.  Though  in  the  mean  time,  if  there  be  fuch  a 
Law  or  Cuftom  for  their  Freedom,  to  encourage  'em  to  Chriftianity,  be 
it  reafonable  or  otherwife,  this  is  certain,  that  none  can  excufe  thofe 
who  for  that  Reafon  mould  any  way  hinder  or  difcourage  'em  from 
being  Chriftians ;  fome  of  whofe  excufes  are  almoft  too  fhameful  to 
repeat,  fince  they  feem  to  reflecl:  on  the  Chriftian  Religion,  as  if  that 
made  Men  more  untradtable  and  ungovernable,  than  when  bred  in 
Ignorance  and  Heathenifm,  which  muft  proceed  from  the  Perverfenefs 
of  fome  Tempers,  as  before,  fitter  for  Slaves  than  Freedom ;  or  for 
want  of  good  Inftrudlion,  when  they  have  nothing  but  the  name  of 
Chriftianity,  without  underftanding  any  thing  of  the  Obligation  thereof; 
or  Laftly,  From  the  bad  Examples  of  their  Mafter's  themfelves,  who 
live  fuch  lives  as  often  fcandalize  thefe  honefter  Heathens." 

We  fhall  force  no  inferences  from  this  document 
as  to  the  character  of  the  legiflation  againft  which  it 
was  diredted.  It  is  an  argument  for  the  "right  to 
Religion/'  in  that  day  fo  univerfally  denied,  in  prac 
tice  at  leaft,  to  enflaved  Indians  and  Negroes,  and 
their  offspring,  that  it  would  be  flrange,  if  true,  that 
Maffachufetts  furnilhed  any  but  occafional  exceptions 
to  the  prevailing  rule.1 

1  "  Slaves  were  admitted  to  be  church  members  at  a  period  when  church 
members  had  peculiar  political  privileges."  Quincfs  Reports,  30,  note.  This 
is  Mr.  Justice  Gray's  ftatement  on  the  following  authorities  : 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  95 

We  have  previoufly  noticed  Sewall's  "  effay "  to 
prevent  Indians  and  Negroes  being  rated  with  brutes 
in  the  tax-laws,  in  the  year  1716.  Three  years  later, 
a  new  occafion  prefented  itfelf  for  the  renewal  of  his 
efforts  in  behalf  of  the  oppreffed.  A  mafter  had  killed 
his  negro  flave,  and  was  about  to  anfwer  for  the  offence 
before  the  Court.  One  of  the  judges  feems  to  have 
defired  the  aid  and  counfel  of  the  Chief  Juftice  in  his 

1.  Wlnthrop^s  Journal,  n.,  26,  and  Savage's  note.  "  Mo.  2.  13.  [1641]. 
A  negro  maid,  fervant  to  Mr.  Stoughton  of  Dorchefter,  being  well  approved 
by  divers  years'  experience,  for  found  knowledge  and  true  godlinefs,  was 
received  into  the  church  and  baptized."     Mr.  Savage's  note  is,   "  Similar 
inftances  have  been  common  enough  ever  fince." 

2.  Ancient  Charters,  117.     "  To  the  end  the  body  of  the  freemen  may 
be  preferred  of  honeft  and  good  men  :  It  is  ordered,  that  henceforth  no 
man  (hall  be  admitted  to  the  freedom  of  this  Commonwealth,  but  fuch  as 
are  members  of  fome  of  the  churches  within  the  limits  of  this  jurifdiftion." 

3.  Bancroft's  Hiftory  U.  S.t  I.,  360.     "  The  fervant,  the  bondman,  might 
be  a  member  of  the  church,  and  therefore  a  freeman  of  the  Company." 

Notwithftanding  this  array  of  authority,  we  muft  fuggeft  our  doubts, 
i  ft.  Whether  the  notice  itfelf  by  Winthrop  is  not  a  palpable  evidence  of 
the  extraordinary  and  exceptional  charafter  of  the  incident  that  a  negro 
maid-fervant  mould  be  baptized  and  received  into  the  church  ?  Mr.  Savage's 
remark  cannot  be  regarded  as  authority,  not  being  fuftained  by  references 
to  any  fimilar  inftances.  2d.  Whether  a  fingle  inftance  has  ever  been  found 
or  is  known  in  the  hiftory  of  Maflachufetts,  during  the  period  referred  to, 
in  which  a  fervant  or  bondman,  black  or  white,  actually  became  a  freeman 
of  the  Company  ? 

Mr.  Palfrey  indulges  in  fome  pleafing  fpeculations  on  this  topic.  "  A 
negro  flave  might  be  a  member  of  the  church,  and  this  faft  prefents  a  curi 
ous  queftion.  As  a  church-member,  he  was  eligible  to  the  political  fran- 
chife ;  and  if  he  (hould  be  aftually  invefted  with  it,  he  would  have  a  part  in 
making  laws  to  govern  his  mafter, — laws  with  which  his  mafter,  if  a  non- 
communicant,  would  have  had  no  concern,  except  to  obey  them."  Touch- 
ftone  wifely  faid  there  was  "  much  virtue  in  If,"  and  Dr.  South  has  a 
maxim  that  "  we  are  not  to  build  certain  rules  on  the  contingency  of  human 
a6Hons."  Whether  the  hiftorian  recalled  either  "  inftance,"  we  cannot  fay  5 
but  here  he  evidently  recognized  the  impropriety  of  conftrufting  hiftory  on 
a  frame  of  conje&ural  contingencies,  and  frankly  admitted  at  the  end  of  his 


96  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

preparations  for  the  cafe,  and  Sewall's  Letter-Book 
preferves  the  following  memoranda  of  what  he  com 
municated. 

"  The  poorer!  Boys  and  Girls  in  this  Province, 
fuch  as  are  of  the  loweft  Condition ;  whether  they  be 
Englim,  or  Indians,  or  Ethiopians  :  They  have  the 
fame  Right  to  Religion  and  Life,  that  the  Richer! 
Heirs  have. 

cc  And  they  who  go  about  to  deprive  them  of  this 
Right,  they  attempt  the  bombarding  of  HEAVEN, 
and  the  Shells  they  throw,  will  fall  down  upon  their  own 
heads. 

cc  Mr.  Juftice  Davenport,  Sir,  upon  your  defire, 
I  have  fent  you  thefe  ghiotations,  and  my  own  Senti- 

note,  "  it  is  improbable  that  the  Court  would  have  made  a  flave — while  a 
flave — a  member  of  the  Company,  though  he  were  a  communicant."  His 
tory  of  N emu  England,  n.,  30,  note.  As  to  baptifm  of  flaves  in  Maflachufetts, 
fee  ante,  pp.  58-59.  Compare  Nurd's  Lanv  of  Freedom  and  Bondage,  Fol.i., 
pp.  165,  210,  358.  The  famous  French  Code  Noir  of  1685  obliged  every 
planter  to  have  his  Negroes  baptized,  and  properly  inftrufted  in  the  doc 
trines  and  duties  of  Chriftianity.  Nor  was  this  the  only  important  and  hu 
mane  provifion  of  that  celebrated  ftatute,  to  which  we  may  feek  in  vain  for 
any  parallel  in  Britifh  Colonial  legiflation.  Its  influence  was  felt  in  Eng 
land,  and  may  have  given  rife  to  thofe  humane  inftruclions,  one  of  which 
we  have  already  quoted  (p.  52).  Another  required  his  Majefty's  Governors 
"  with  the  afliftance  of  our  Council  to  find  out  the  beft  means  to  facilitate 
and  encourage  the  Converfion  of  Negros  and  Indians  to  the  Chriftian 
Religion."  N.  T.  Col.  Doc.,  in.,  374.  Evelyn,  in  his  Diary,  gives  an  inter- 
efting  account  of  the  determination  of  the  King,  James  II.,  on  this  point- 
At  Winchefter,  16  September,  1685,  he  fays,  "I  may  not  forget  a  refolu 
tion  which  his  Majefty  made,  and  had  a  little  before  entered  upon  it  at  the 
Council  Board  at  Windfor  or  Whitehall,  that  the  negroes  in  the  Planta 
tions  mould  all  be  baptized,  exceedingly  declaiming  againft  the  impiety  of 
their  mafters  prohibiting  it,  out  of  a  miftaken  opinion  that  they  would  be 
ipfo  fatfo  free ;  but  his  Majefty  perfifts  in  his  refolution  to  have  them  chris 
tened,  which  piety  the  Bifhop  bleflfed  him  for."  Works,  II.,  245.  This  was 
good  Bifhop  Ken,  the  Chriftian  Pfalmift. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  97 

ments.  I  pray  GOD,  the  Giver  and  Guardian  of 
Life,  to  give  his  gracious  Direction  to  you,  and  the 
other  Juftices ;  and  take  leave,  who  am  your  brother 
and  moft  humble  fervant, 

cc  Samuel  Sewall. 

"  Bofton,  July  20,  1719. 

"  I  inclofed  alfo  the  Selling  of  Jqfeph,  and  my  Ex 
tract  out  of  the  Athenian  Oracle. 

"  To  Addington  Davenport,  Efqr.,  etc.,  going  to  Judge  Sam1.  Smith 
of  Sandwich,  for  killing  his  Negro." 

That  fuch  arguments  were  neceflary,  or  even  re 
garded  as  appropriate  on  fuch  an  occafion,  is  a  fact  full 
of  meaning.  We  have  previoufly  intimated  a  doubt 
whether  the  flave  could  claim  any  right  or  privilege 
of  protection  under  the  laws  which  were  known  as  the 
<c  Liberties  of  Servants  ; "  and  in  connection  with  the 
inftructions  to  Andros  in  1688,  we  have  called  the  at 
tention  of  the  reader  to  the  diftinction  between  the 
Chriftian  fervants  or  (laves  and  the  Indians  and  Negroes. 
The  former  were  to  be  protected  againft  the  inhuman 
feverity  of  ill-mafters  or  overfeers,  while  the  latter 
were  to  be  fo  far  advanced  in  the  fcale  of  humanity, 
that  the  "  wilful  killing  "  of  them  mould  "  be  punifhed 
with  death,  and  a  fitt  penalty  impofed  for  the  maiming 
of  them." 

We  cannot,  however,  at  prefent  attempt  to  deter 
mine  what  were  the  actual  legal  restraints  upon  the 
power  of  a  matter  over  his  flave,  in  MafTachufetts. 
We  do  not  know  that  the  materials  for  fuch  a  deter- 
7 


98  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

mination  exift  anywhere  fave  in  fuch  records  as  remain 
of  thofe  ancient  tribunals  of  the  Colony  and  Province 
by  which  alone  the  rights  of  perfons  and  of  property 
were  then,  as  now,  judicially  afcertained  and  regulated 
There  are  abundant  modern  ftatements  of  opinion  on 
thefe  points,  but  we  cannot  recall  a  {ingle  inftance  in 
which  thefe  ftatements  are  fortified  by  good  and  fuffi- 
cient  testimony  from  the  ancient  and  contemporary 
records  or  authorities  ;  and  we  cannot  doubt  that  the 
reader  of  thefe  notes  will  fympathize  in  our  defire  to 
reft  on  fads  rather  than  opinions.  For  example,  in 
the  particular  cafe  above  referred  to,  the  awful 
folemnity  with  which  the  Chief  Juftice  communicates 
his  charge  to  his  brother  magiftrate  when  about  to 
"judge"  a  mafter  for  "killing  his  Negro,"  gives 
peculiar  intereft  to  the  refult ;  and  it  is  greatly  to  be 
regretted  that  the  record  of  the  trial,  conviction,  and 
punimment  of  fuch  an  offender  mould  be  concealed 
among  the  neglected  rubbim  of  any  MafTachufetts 
Court-Houfe,  If  Samuel  Smith  of  Sandwich  was 
hung  for  the  murder  of  his  {lave  in  Maflachufetts  in 
the  year  1719,  it  is  due  to  the  hiftoric  fame  of  the 
Province  that  the  world  mould  know  it ! 

We  are  perfectly  aware  that  the  opinion  has  pre 
vailed  that  the  negro  or  mulatto  or  Indian  {lave  in 
Maflachufetts,  "  always  had  many  rights  which  raifed 
him  far  above  the  abfolute  {lave."  Thefe  are  nowhere 
more  favorably  ftated  than  by  Nathan  Dane,  in  his 
great  work  on  ^American  Law.  Abridgment,  n.,  313. 
He  confiders  the  fubject  in  eight  points  of  view  : 


cc 


i.  The  mafter  has  no  control  over  the  religion 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  99 

of  fuch  flave,  any  more  than  over  the  religion  of  any 
other  member  of  his  family  ; 

"  2.  None  over  his  life ;  if  he  killed  him,  he  was 
punifhable  as  for  killing  a  freeman  ; 

"  3.  The  mafter  was  liable  to  his  flave' s  action,  for 
beating,  wounding  or  immoderately  chaftifing  him,  as 
much  as  for  immoderately  correcting  an  apprentice,  or 
a  child; 

"  4.  The  flave  was  capable  of  holding  property,  as 
a  devifee  or  legatee,  and  as  recovered  for  wounds,  etc., 
fo  much  fo,  if  the  mafter  took  away  fuch  property,  his 
flave  could  fue  him  by  prochein  ame  ; 

"  5.  If  one  took  him  from  his  mafter  without  his 
confent,  he  could  not  have  trover,  but  only  fue,  as  for 
taking  away  his  other  fervant ;  on  the  whole  the  flave 
had  the  right  of  property  and  of  life,  as  apprentices 
had,  and  the  only  difference  was  '  an  apprentice  is  a 
fervant  for  time,  and  the  flave  is  a  fervant  for  life/ 
In  Connecticut,  the  flave  was,  by  ftatute,  fpecially  for 
bidden  to  contract ;  no  fuch  ftatute  is  recollected  in 
Maflachufetts ; 

"  6.  If  a  flave  married  a  free  woman,  with  the  con 
fent  of  his  mafter,  he  was  emancipated,  for  his  mafter 
had  fuffered  him  to  contract  a  relation  inconfiftent 
with  a  ftate  of  flavery  ;  c  hereby  the  mafter  abandoned 
his  right  to  him  as  a  flave,  as  a  minor  child  is  emanci 
pated  from  his  father  when  he  is  married/  Ld.  Ray 
mond,  356; 

"  7.  A  flave  however  could  be  fold,  and  in  fome 
ftates  be  taken  in  execution  for  his  matter's  debts  ;  but 
no  evidence  is  found  of  fuch  taking  in  execution  in 
Maflachufetts ; 


ioo  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

cc  8.  On  the  principles  of  the  Englifli  Common 
Law,  men  may  be  made  Jlaves  for  life  for  crimes,  and 
fo  clearly,  by  our  prefent  law.  Property  in  a  negro 
[was]  acquired  without  deed,  i  Dal.,  169." 

Now,  if  all  thefe  points  had  been  well  taken  and 
could  be  fortified  by  the  neceflary  amount  of  hiftorical 
teftimony,  they  would  unqueftionably  make  a  very 
good  cafe.  But  unhappily  they  are  mainly  theoretical 
ftatements  derived  from  abftract  reafoning  on  general 
principles,  of  which  no  fuch  applications  were  thought 
of  in  the  period  to  which  they  are  afligned.  Yet  the 
formality  with  which  they  are  ftated,  and  the  dignified 
place  they  hold  in  a  book  of  great  authority,  give 
them  an  importance  beyond  the  conjectures  which  are 
generally  ventured  as  to  how  far  the  lot  of  the  flave 
was  mitigated  in  Maflachufetts. 

Mr.  Dane  copied  them  with  but  flight  alterations, 
chiefly  in  favor  of  Maflachufetts,  from  the  treatife  of 
Judge  Reeve  on  "  Dome/lie  Relations"  pp.  340-41, 
published  in  1816.  There  is  no  reference  to  the 
ftatutes,  nor  to  any  judicial  decifions  on  any  point, 
excepting  as  here  quoted,  either  in  original  or  copy. 

Shall  we  be  accounted  prefumptuous,  if  we  add  a 
few  comments  as  well  as  a  reference  to  the  facts  already 
prefented,  which  muft  throw  great  doubts  over  the 
whole  array  of  rights  thus  claimed  as  having  been  ac 
corded  to  flaves  in  Maflachufetts  ? 

The  right  to  religion  and  life  was  not  clearly 
recognized  as  belonging  equally  to  bond-flave  and  free 
man.  Mr.  Dane  altered  Judge  Reeve's  flatement  of 
the  latter  point.  Judge  Reeve  faid,  cc  if  he  killed  him, 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  101 

he  was  liable  to  the  fame  punifhment  as  for  killing  a  free 
man."  The  alteration  indicates  the  nature  of  the 
doubt  which  may  have  arifen  in  the  mind  of  Mr. 
Dane  when  he  wrote  it,  "  he  was  punifhable  as  for  kill 
ing  a  freeman."  No  doubt  he  was  punifhable.  The 
incident  which  we  have  prefented  of  the  mafter  called 
to  anfwer  before  the  Court  for  the  fact  of  killing  his 
negro  fhows  this.  So  too,  in  the  firft  Maflachufetts 
Code,  even  "  the  Bruite  Creature  "  is  protected  againft 
"  Tirrany  and  Crueltie  "  by  the  very  next  ftatute  after 
that  which  eftablifhes  flavery — a  fignificant  fequence  ! 
Here  let  it  be  remembered  that  the  original  law  of 
flavery  in  Maflachufetts  gave  to  flaves  "  all  the  liber 
ties  and  Chriftian  ufages  which  the  law  of  God,  eftab- 
lifhed  in  Ifrael  concerning  fuch  perfons,  doth  morally 
require."  Now  the  Mosaic  Law  here  recognized  and 
reenacted  did  not  protect  the  life  of  a  heathen  flave 
againft  his  mafter' s  violence,  by  the  penalty  of  "  life 
for  life,"  and  although  fuch  violence  might  be 
punifhed,  the  kind  and  degree  of  punifhment  is  not 
now  to  be  afcertained.  Exodus,  xxi.,  20,  21.  And  there 
is  a  marked  diftinction  to  be  obferved  in  regard  to  the 
Hebrew,  though  a  flave,  who  is  favorably  compared 
with  the  hired  fervant  and  fojourner  in  contraft  with 
the  bondman.  Leviticus,  xxv.,  39,  40.  To  what 
extent  the  "  rigor "  of  heathen  bondage  among  the 
Jews  was  foftened  into  "  liberties  and  Chriftian  ufages" 
among  the  Puritans  is  a  queftion  of  fact  and  not  of 
opinion.  What  was  morally  required  by  the  law  of 
God  eftablifhed  in  Ifrael,  in  this  as  in  all  fimilar 
bufinefs,  was  a  matter  referved  for  their  own  decifion, 
in  their  own  General  Court  and  other  tribunals.  And 


IO2  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

this  general  provifion  in  the  original  law  feems  to  have 
been  the  only  one  to  which  the  (lave  could  appeal,  or 
more  properly  by  which  the  conduct  of  the  matter 
could  be  regulated,  in  the  government  and  difpofition 
of  his  chattel.  It  is  certain  that  moft  of  the  fpecial  pro- 
vifions  of  the  law  refpeding  matters  and  fervants  had 
no  application  to  flaves,  and  we  have  already  expreffed 
the  doubt  whether  flaves  enjoyed  any  of  the  privileges 
of  fervants  under  that  law. 

Where  is  the  evidence  that  Indians  and  Negroes 
in  bondage  were  entitled  to  protection  as  other  fervants  ? 
and  that  the  mailer  was  liable  to  his  flave' s  action  for 
beating,  wounding,  or  immoderately  chattifmg,  etc.  ? 
It  is  far  more  probable  that  the  condition  of  the 
fervant  was  practically  affimilated  to  that  of  the  Have, 
than  that  the  flave  fliared  any  of  the  privileges  accorded 
by  ftatute  to  the  fervant.  It  would  add  much  to  our 
knowledge  on  this  fubjed,  if  the  examples  mould  be 
adduced  to  mow  at  what  period  in  the  hittory  of 
MafTachufetts  the  Indian  and  negro  flave  Jirfl  acquired 
a  flatus  in  Court  as  a  profecutor,  or  in  any  other 
capacity  than  as  a  criminal  at  the  bar,  before  which  he 
was  often  enough  called  to  anfwer  under  the  unjufl 
and  unequal  legiflation  of  that  period.  If  it  was  at 
any  time  before  the  American  Revolution — how  came 
it  to  pafs  that,  in  1783,  a  fine  of  forty  millings  againfl 
a  matter  for'  C£  beating,  bruifing,  and  otherwife  evilly 
intreating "  his  negro-flave,  gave  cc  a  mortal  wound 
to  flavery  in  Maflachufetts  ?"  And  further,  if  a  flave 
could  recover  againft  his  matter  damages  for  cruelty, 
why  was  it  neceflary  to  refort  to  the  fuit  "  by  prochein 
ame  "  to  enable  him  to  keep  his  recovery  ? 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  103 

Again,  where  is  the  evidence  that  flaves  were 
capable  of  holding  property,  etc.,  beyond  the  occa- 
(lonal  and  exceptional  permiflion  to  enjoy  fome  privi 
leges  as  a  peculium,  with  the  profits  of  which  they 
might  in  fome  cafes  be  enabled  even  to  purchafe  their 
manumiflion  ?  Could  flaves  take  and  hold  real  eftate 
in  Maflachuietts  ?  "  No  fervant,  either  man  or 
maid,"  was  permitted  "  to  give,  fell  or  truck  any 
commodity  whatfoever  without  licenfe  from  their 
Matters,  during  the  time  of  their  fervice,  under  pain 
of  fine,  or  corporal  punifhment,  at  the  difcretion  of 
the  Court,  as  the  offence  mall  deferve."  Mafs.  Laws, 
Ed.  1672,  p.  104.  Is  it  probable  that  a  flave  was  on 
any  better  footing  in  this  refpect  than  a  white  ferv 
ant? 

As  to  the  form  of  action  by  which  a  mailer  mould 
fue  for  the  unlawful  taking  of  his  flave  without  his 
confent — the  only  examples  of  fuch  fuits  in  Mafla 
chufetts  to  which  we  are  able  to  refer,  contradict  the 
opinion  that  he  could  not  have  trover,  but  muft  fue 
in  trefpafs  per  quod  Jervitium  amifit.  Goodfpeed  v.  Gay, 
Mafs.  Sup,  Court  Records,  1763,  foL  47,  101.  Allifon  v. 
Cockran,  Ibid.  1764,  foL  103.  The  right  to  maintain 
trover  for  a  negro  was  a  matter  of  courfe  in  Mafla 
chufetts,  for  there  can  be  no  queflion  as  to  the  fact 
that  he  might  be  held  and  fold  as  a  chattel  under  the 
laws  of  that  Colony  and  Province,  and  trover  lies  by 
any  one  who  has  any  fpecial  property  in  a  chattel, 
with  the  right  to  immediate  pofleflion.  Compare  Gray, 
in  Quincys  Reports,  93,  note,  where  all  the  authorities 
are  cited. 

The  marriage  of  flaves  in  Maflachufetts  has  already 


IO4  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

been  noticed,  and  it  is  obvious  that  the  legiflators 
of  Maflachufetts  never  intended  that  fuch  marriages 
fhould  confer  any  rights  or  impofe  any  duties  which 
were  incompatible  with  the  ftate  of  flavery  ;  and  it 
may  fafely  be  alleged  that  no  inftance  can  be  produced 
of  the  emancipation  of  a  flave  as  a  legal  confequence 
of  marriage  with  a  free  woman.1 

The  candor  of  the  admiflion  "that  a  flave  how 
ever  could  be  fold,  and  in  fome  ftates  be  taken  in 
execution  for  his  matter's  debts,"  is  unhappily  quali 
fied  by  the  aflertion  that  cc  no  evidence  is  found  of 
fuch  taking  in  execution  in  Maflachufetts."  The 
only  reafon  it  was  not  found  was,  that  it  was  not 
hunted ;  for  the  failure  to  find  it  muft  have  been 
either  from  want  of  difpofition  or  lack  of  dili 
gence. 

But  we  have  faid  enough  on  thefe  topics  to  put 
thofe  who  are  mofl  interefted  upon  inquiry.  Thofe 
who  are  familiar  with  fuch  refearches  and  have  oppor 
tunities  of  eafy  reference  to  the  records  and  files  of  the 
Courts  in  Maflachufetts  during  the  period  of  which 
we  are  writing,  can  probably  collate  a  fufficient  number 
of  examples  to  fettle  all  thefe  queftions  by  authority. 
They  will  undoubtedly  illuftrate  the  gradual  ameliora 
tion  of  all  the  various  forms  of  oppreflion,  but  thefe 
changes  muft  be  held  to  mark  the  era  of  their  hiftorical 
development.  If  they  prove  that  the  doubts  we  have 


1  We  have  been  unable  to  verify  the  reference  to  "  Lord  Raymond, 
356,"  as  to  the  analogous  emancipation  of  a  minor  child  "from  his  father 
when  he  is  married  " — but  we  have  high  authority  for  the  ftatement  that  the 
laws  of  Maflachufetts  know  of  no  fuch  emancipation.  15  Mafs.  Reports^ 
203. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  105 

fuggefted  are  not  well  founded,  we  fliall  be  moft  grati 
fied  with  the  refult. 

The  ultimate  theory  of  flavery  in  all  ages  and  na 
tions  has  been  reduced  to  a  very  brief  and  compre- 
henfive  ftatement.  Dr.  Maine,  in  his  admirable  trea- 
tife  on  Ancient  Law,  fays  that  "  the  fimple  wifli  to 
ufe  the  bodily  powers  of  another  perfon  as  a  means 
of  miniftering  to  one's  own  eafe  or  pleafure  is  doubt- 
lefs  the  foundation  of  flavery  and  as  old  as  human 
nature."  And  again,  "  there  feems  to  be  fomething 
in  the  inftitution  of  flavery  which  has  at  all  times 
either  {hocked  or  perplexed  mankind,  however  little 
habituated  to  reflection,  and  however  flightly  advanced 
in  the  cultivation  of  its  moral  inftincts."  To  fatisfy 
the  confcience  of  the  mafter,  the  Greeks  eftabliflied 
the  idea  of  intellectual  inferiority  of  certain  races  and 
confequent  natural  aptitude  for  the  fervile  condition. 
The  Romans  declared  the  doctrine  of  a  fuppofed  agree 
ment  between  victor  and  vanquifhed,  in  which  the  firft 
flipulated  for  the  perpetual  fervices  of  his  foe,  and  the 
other  gained  in  confideration  the  life  which  he  had 
legitimately  forfeited.  Compare  Maine,  162—66. 

The  Puritans  of  New  England  appear  to  have  been 
neither  fliocked  nor  perplexed  with  the  inflitution,  for 
which  they  made  ample  provifion  in  their  earlieft  code. 
They  were  familiar  with  the  Greek  and  Roman  ideas 
on  the  fubject,  and  added  the  conviction  that  flavery 
was  eftabliflied  by  the  law  of  God,  and  that  Chris 
tianity  always  recognized  it  as  the  antecedent  Mofaic 
practice.  On  thefe  foundations,  is  it  ftrange  that  it 
held  its  place  fo  long  in  the  history  of  Maflachu- 
fetts  ? 


io6  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

It  has  been  said  that  the  firft  ftep  towards  the 
deftrudion  of  flavery  was  the  reftraint  or  prohibition 
of  the  importation  of  flaves.  But  it  would  be  abfurd 
to  regard  laws  for  this  purpofe  as  an  expreffion  of 
humane  confideration  for  the  negroes.  Graham,  in 
his  hiftory,  characterizes  fuch  a  view  of  the  moft 
ftringent  one  ever  made  in  any  of  the  Colonies,  as  an 
"impudent  abfurdity."  Hift.  U.  £,  iv.,  78.  We 
have  already  noticed  the  Maflachufetts  ads  of  1705, 
with  the  additional  ads  of  1728  and  1739,  imposing 
and  enforcing  the  collection  of  an  import  duty  of  four 
pounds  per  head  upon  all  negroes  brought  into  the 
Province. 

There  is  no  indication  in  the  ads  themfelves,  nor 
have  we  been  able  to  find  any  evidence,  that  they  were 
intended  other  than  as  revenue  ads,  beyond  that  which 
we  have  prefented  in  thefe  notes. 

We  have  heretofore  quoted  the  inftrudion  of  the 
town  of  Bofton  in  1701.  It  is  not  improbable  that  it 
was  the  refult  of  Judge  SewalFs  efforts  in  1700. 
Fruitlefs  as  it  was,  it  mows  that  even  then  fome  were 
wife  enough  to  fee  that  the  importation  of  negroes  was 
not  fo  beneficial  to  the  Crown  or  Country  as  that  of 
white  fervants  would  be.  In  1706,  an  eflay  or  "  Com 
putation  that  the  Importation  of  Negroes  is  not  Jo  profit 
able  as  that  of  White  Servants  "  was  published  in  Bofton, 
which  may  properly  be  reproduced  here.  It  was  the 
firft  newfpaper  article  againft  the  importation  of 
negroes  publifhed  in  America,  and  appeared  in  the 
Bofton  News-Letter,  No.  112,  June  10,  1706.  We 
are  inclined  to  attribute  this  article  alfo  to  Judge 
Sewall. 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  107 

"  By  laft  Year's  Bill  of  Mortality  for  the  Town  of  Bqfton,  in 
Number  100  News-Letter  ^Q.  are  furnifhed  with  a  Lift  of  44  Negroes 
dead  laft  year,  which  being  computed  one  with  another  at  3O/.  per 
Head,  amounts  to  the  Sum  of  One  Thoufand  three  hundred  and 
Twenty  Pounds,  of  which  we  would  make  this  Remark  :  That  the  Im 
porting  of  Negroes  into  this  or  the  Neighboring  Provinces  is  not  fo 
beneficial  either  to  the  Crown  or  Country,  as  White  Servants  would  be. 

"  For  Negroes  do  not  carry  Arms  to  defend  the  Country  as 
Whites  do. 

"  Negroes  are  generally  Eye-Servants,  great  Thieves,  much 
addifted  to  Stealing,  Lying  and  Purloining. 

"  They  do  not  People  our  Country  as  Whites  would  do  whereby 
we  mould  be  ftrengthened  againft  an  Enemy. 

"  By  Encouraging  the  Importing  of  White  Men  Servants,  allowing 
fomewhat  to  the  Importer,  moil  Hufbandmen  in  the  Country  might  be 
furnifhed  with  Servants  for  8,  9,  or  io/.  a  Head,  who  are  not  able  to 
launch  out  40  or  5o/.  for  a  Negro  the  now  common  Price. 

"  A  Man  then  might  buy  a  White  Man  Servant  we  fuppofe  for  io/. 
to  ferve  4  years,  and  Boys  for  the  fame  price  to  Serve  6,  8,  or  io 
years;  If  a  White  Servant  die,  the  Lofs  exceeds  not  io/.  but  if  a  Negro 
dies,  'tis  a  very  great  lofs  to  the  Hufbandman ;  Three  years  Intereft 
of  the  price  of  the  Negro,  will  near  upon  if  not  altogether  purchafe  a 
White  Man  Servant. 

"  If  Neceffity  call  for  it,  that  the  Hufbandman  muft  fit  out  a  Man 
againft  the  Enemy  j  if  he  has  a  Negro  he  cannot  fend  him,  but  if  he 
has  a  White  Servant,  'twill  anfwer  the  end,  and  perhaps  save  his  Son  at 
home. 

"  Were  Merchants  and  Mafters  Encouraged  as  already  faid  to  bring 
in  Men  Servants,  there  needed  not  be  fuch  Complaint  againft  Superiors 
Impreffing  our  Children  to  the  War,  there  would  then  be  Men  enough 
to  be  had  without  Impreffing. 

"The  bringing  in  of  fuch  Servants  would  much  enrich  this  Province 
becaufe  Hufbandmen  would  not  only  be  able  far  better  to  manure 
what  Lands  are  already  under  Improvement,  but  would  alfo  improve  a 
great  deal  more  that  now  lyes  wafte  under  Woods,  and  enable  this 
Province  to  fet  about  railing  of  Naval  Stores,  which  would  be  greatly 
advantageous  to  the  Crown  of  England,  and  this  Province. 

"  For   the   raifmg   of  Hemp  here,  fo  as  to  make  Sail-cloth  and 


io8  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Cordage  to  furnifh  but  our  own  fhipping,  would  hinder  the  Importing 
it,  and  fave  a  confiderable  fum  in  a  year  to  make  Returns  for  which  we 
now  do,  and  in  time  might  be  capacitated  to  furniih  England  not  only 
with  Sail-cloth  and  Cordage,  but  likewife  with  Pitch,  Tar,  Hemp,  and 
other  Stores  which  they  are  now  obliged  to  purchafe  in  Foreign  Na 
tions. 

"  Suppofe  the  Government  here  mould  allow  Forty  Shillings  per- 
head  for  five  years,  to  fuch  as  fhould  Import  every  of  thefe  years 
100  White  Men  Servants,  and  each  to  ferve  4  years,  the  coft  would  be 
but  2OO/.  a  year,  and  a  looo/.  for  the  5  years.  The  firft  100  Servants, 
being  free  the  4th  year  they  ferve  the  5th  for  Wages,  and  the  6th 
there  is  100  that  goes  out  into  the  Woods,  and  fettles  a  100  Families 
to  Strengthen  and  Baracado  us  from  the  Indians,  and  alfo  a  100  Fami 
lies  more  every  year  fucceffively. 

"  And  here  you  fee  that  in  one  year  the  Town  of  Bofton  has  loft 
I32O/.  by  44  Negroes,  which  is  alfo  a  lofs  to  the  Country  in  general, 
and  for  a  lefs  lofs  (if  it  may  be  improperly  be  fo  called)  for  a  looo/. 
the  Country  may  have  500  Men  in  5  years  time  for  the  44  Negroes 
dead  in  one  year. 

'*  A  certain  perfbn  within  thefe  6  years  had  two  Negroes  dead 
computed  both  at  6o/.  which  would  have  procured  him  iix  white  Ser 
vants  at  io/.  per  head  to  have  Served  24  years,  at  4  years  apiece, 
without  running  fuch  a  great  rifque,  and  the  Whites  would  have 
ftrengthened  the  Country,  that  Negroes  do  not. 

"  'Twould  do  well  that  none  of  thofe  Servants  be  liable  to  be  Im- 
prefled  during  their  Service  of  Agreement  at  their  first  Landing. 

"  That  fuch  Servants  being  Sold  or  Tranfported  out  of  this  Prov 
ince  during  the  time  of  their  Service,  the  Perfon  that  buys  them  be 
liable  to  pay  3/.  into  the  Treafury." 

A  third  of  a  century  after  the  publication  of  Judge 
Sewall's  tract,  another  made  its  appearance,  entitled 
<c  A  Testimony  againft  that  Anti-Chriftian  Practice 
of  making  Slaves  of  Men  Wherein  it  is  fhewed  to  be 
contrary  to  the  Difpenfation  of  the  Law,  and  Time 
of  the  Gofpel,  and  very  oppofite  both  to  Grace  and 
Nature.  By  Elihu  Coleman.  Matthew  7.  12. 


Slavery  in  Majfachiifetts.  109 

Therefore  all  things  whatfoever  ye  would  that  men 
fhould  do  unto  you,  do  ye  even  fo  to  them,  for  this 
is  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  Printed  in  the  year 
1733."  MS.  Copy  in  the  Library  of  the  American  Anti 
quarian  Society.  This  writer  was  a  minifter  of  the  So 
ciety  of  Friends,  and  of  Nantucket.  His  work  was 
written  in  1729-30.  Coffins  Newbury,  p.  338.  Macfs 
Nantucket)  p.  279. 

At  the  Nantucket  Monthly  Meeting,  in  1716,  it 
was  determined  as  ccyefenfe  and  judgment  of  this 
meeting,  that  it  is  not  agreeable  to  truth  for  Friends 
to  purchafe  flaves  and  hold  them  term  of  life."  M acy  s 
Nantucket l,  p.  281. 

In  1755,  March  10,  the  town  of  Salem  authorized 
a  petition  to  the  General  Court  againft  the  importa 
tion  of  negroes.  Felt's  Salem,  n.,  416.  There  may 
have  been  other  occafional  efforts  of  this  fort,  but  they 
muft  have  been  comparatively  few  and  fruitlefs. 

We  have  thus  noticed  the  moft  important,  if  not 
the  only  anti-flavery  demonftrations  which  appear  in 
the  hiftory  of  MafTachufetts  down  to  the  period  im 
mediately  preceding  the  Revolution.  Excepting  thofe 
already  mentioned,  we  know  of  no  public  advocates 
for  the  flave  in  that  Colony  and  Province  until  the 
cry  of  refinance  to  Britifh  tyranny  began  to  refound 
through  the  Colonies. 

James  Otis' s  great  fpeech  in  the  famous  Caufe  of 
the  Writs  of  Affiftance  in  1761 — the  firft  fcene  of  the 
firft  ad  of  oppofition  to  the  arbitrary  claims  of  Great 
Britain — declared  the  rights  of  man,  inherent  and  in 
alienable.  In  that  fpeech  the  poor  negroes  were  not 


no  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

forgotten.  None  ever  afTerted  their  rights  in  ftronger 
terms.  Adams  s  Works,  x.,  315.  Mr.  Bancroft 
postpones  Otis's  "proteft  againfl  negro  flavery"  to  a 
later  year  (1764),  when  he  translated  the  <c  fcathing 
fatire  "  of  Montefquieu  in  his  aflertion  and  proof  of 
the  rights  of  the  Britifh  Colonies.  This  difference  in 
time  is  not  material  for  our  prefent  purpofe.  Many 
years  were  to  pafs  away  before  his  views  on  this  fub- 
ject  were  accepted  by  the  children's  children  of  thofe 
to  whom  his  words  then  founded  like  a  rhapfody  and 
an  extravagance. 

It  was  a  ftrong  arm,  and  it  ftruck  a  fturdy  blow, 
but  the  wedge  recoiled  and  flew  out  from  the  tough 
black  knot  of  flavery,  which  was  deftined  to  outlaft 
the  fiercer!:  fires  of  the  Revolution  in  MaiTachufetts, 
thus  kindled  with  live  coals  from  the  altar  of  univerfal 
liberty. 

John  Adams  heard  the  words  of  Otis,  and  "  fhud- 
dered  at  the  dodrine  he  taught,"  and  to  the  end  of 
his  long  life  continued  "to  fhudder  at  the  confe- 
quences  that  may  be  drawn  from  fuch  premifes."  Yet 
John  Adams  "adored  the  idea  of  gradual  abolitions." 
Works,  x.,  315.  For  his  later  views  on  emancipation, 
see  Works,  vi.,  511.,  x.,  379. 

The  views  exprefled  by  Otis  muft  have  founded 
ftrangely  in  the  ears  of  men  who  "lived  (as  John 
Adams  himfelf  fays  he  did)  for  many  years  in  times 
when  the  practice  [of  flavery]  was  not  difgraceful, 
when  the  beft  men  in  my  vicinity  thought  it  not  in- 
confiftent  with  their  character."  Works,  x.,  380.  If 
there  was  a  prevailing  public  fentiment  againft  flavery 
in  Maflachufetts — as  has  been  conftantly  claimed  of 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  in 

late — the  people  of  that  day,  far  lefs  demonftrative 
than  their  descendants,  had  an  extraordinary  way  of 
not  fhowing  it.  Hutchinfon,  who  was  undoubtedly 
the  man  of  his  time  moft  familiar  with  the  hiftory  of 
.  his  native  province,  fays  in  his  firft  volume,  publifhed 
in  1764,  p.  444,  "Some  judicious  perfons  are  of 
opinion  that  the  permiffion  of  flavery  has  been  a 
publick  mifchief."  This  is  certainly  the  indication 
of  a  very  mild  type  of  oppofition — by  no  means  of  a 
pervading  public  fentiment. 

John  Adams  was  not  alone  in  his  aftonifhment  at 
the  ideas  expreffed  by  Otis.  Thefe  ideas  were  new  as 
they  were  ftartling  to  the  people  of  Maffachufetts  in 
that  day.  And  to  the  calm  judgment  of  the  hiftorian 
there  is  nothing  ftrange  in  the  fact  that  the  foremoft 
man  of  his  time  in  that  province  mould  have  fhud- 
dered  at^the  doctrines  which  Otis  taught.  More  than 
a  century  paffed  away  before  all  the  ancient  badges  of 
fervitude  could  be  removed  from  the  colored  races  in 
Maffachufetts,  if  indeed  it  be  even  now  true  that  none 
of  thofe  difabilities  which  fo  ftrongly  mark  the  focial 
ftatus  of  the  negro  flill  linger  in  the  legiflation  of  that 
State. 


VI. 


AMONG  the  flrongeft  indications  of  the  coming 
change  in  opinion  on  this  fubjed,  the  "fuits  for 
liberty,"  as  they  are  called,  challenge  attention.  They 
are  alfo  known  as  "  fuits  for  freedom,"  and  "  fuits  for 
fervice,"  in  which  flaves  "  fued  their  mailers  for  free- 


ii2  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

dom  and  for  recompence  for  their  fervice,  after  they 
had  attained  the  age  of  twenty-one  years."  M. .  H.  S. 
Coll.,  i.,  iv.  202. 

There  had  been  a  cafe  in  Connecticut  as  early  as 
1703,  in  which  a  matter  was  fummoned  to  anfwer, 
before  a  County  Court,  cc  to  Abda,  a  mulatto,  in  an 
action  of  the  cafe,  for  his  unjuft  holding  and  detaining 
the  faid  Abda  in  his  fervice  as  his  bondfman,  for  the 
fpace  of  one  year  laft  paft."  The  damages  were  laid  at 
2o/.  The  refult  was  a  verdict  againft  the  mafter  for 
I2/.  damages — cc  thereby  virtually  eftablifhing  Abda's 
right  to  freedom."  J.  H.  ^rumbuW  s  Notes  from  the 
Original  Papers,  etc.  Conn.  Courant,  Nov.  9,  1850.  In 
this  cafe,  the  ground  on  which  the  {lave  refted  his 
claim  appears  to  have  been  his  white  blood. 

The  earlier!  of  thefe  cafes  in  MafTachufetts,  of 
which  we  have  any  knowledge,  is  noticed  in  the  Diary 
of  John  Adams.  It  was  in  the  Superior  Court  at 
Salem,  in  1766.  Under  date  of  Wednefday,  Novem 
ber  5th,  he  fays:  <c  Attended  Court;  heard  the  trial 
of  an  action  of  trefpafs,  brought  by  a  mulatto  woman, 
for  damages,  for  reftraining  her  of  her  liberty.  This 
is  called  fuing  for  liberty ;  the  firft  action  that  ever  I 
knew  of  the  fort,  though  I  have  heard  there  have  been 
many."  Works,  u.,  200. 

1  If  any  of  thefe  decifions  in  Maflachufetts  fustalned  the  claims  for  wages, 
they  are  in  strong  contrast  with  the  highest  Englifh  authority  of  the  period. 
Many  aftions  were  brought  in  the  Englifh  Courts,  by  negro  flaves  against 
their  masters  for  wages  ;  but  Lord  Mansfield,  the  great  oracle  of  the  Com 
mon  Law,  was  accustomed  to  deal  very  fummarily  with  them.  He  has  left 
a  very  emphatic  record  on  this  point : 

"  When  flaves  have  been  brought  here,  and  have  commenced  aftions  for 
their  wages,  I  have  always  nonfuited  the  plaintiff."  The  King  v.  the  In 
habitants  of  Thames  Ditton.  4  Doug.,  300. 


Slavery  in  Ma/achufetts.  113 

We  fuppofe  this  to  have  been  the  cafe  of  Jenny 
Slew  vs.  John  Whip-pie,  jr.,  the  record  of  which  we 
copy  here. 

"  JENNY  SLEW  of  Ipfwich  in  the  County  of  Eflex,  fpinfter,  Pltff., 
agft.  JOHN  WHIPPLE,  Jun.,  of  faid  Ipfwich  Gentleman,  Deft.,  in  a  Plea 
of  Trefpafs  for  that  the  faid  John  on  the  2pth  day  of  January,  A.  D. 
1762,  at  Ipfwich  aforefaid  with  force  and  arms  took  her  the  faid  Jenny, 
held  and  kept  her  in  fervitude  as  a  flave  in  his  fervice,  and  has 
reftrained  her  of  her  liberty  from  that  time  to  the  fifth  of  March  laft 
without  any  lawfull  right  &  authority  fo  to  do  and  did  her  other 
injuries  againft  the  peace  &  to  the  damage  of  faid  Jenny  Slew  as  (he 
faith  the  fum  of  twenty-five  pounds.  This  action  was  firft  brought  at 
laft  March  Court  at  Ipfwich  when  &  where  the  parties  appeared  &  the 
cafe  was  continued  by  order  of  Court  to  the  then  next  term  when  & 
where  the  PltfF  appeared  &  the  faid  John  Whipple  Jun,  came  by  Ed 
mund  Trowbridge,  Efq.  his  attorney  &  defended  when  he  faid  that 
there  is  no  fuch  perfon  in  nature  as  Jenny  Slew  of  Ipfwich  aforefaid, 
Spinfter,  &  this  the  faid  John  was  ready  to  verify  wherefore  the  writ 
mould  be  abated  &  he  prayed  judgment  accordingly  which  plea  was 
overruled  by  the  Court  and  afterwards  the  faid  John  by  the  faid  Ed 
mund  made  a  motion  to  the  Court  &  praying  that  another  perfon  might 
endorfe  the  writ  &  be  fubjeft  to  coft  if  any  mould  finally  be  for  the 
Court  but  the  Court  rejected  the  motion  and  then  the  Deft,  faving  his 
plea  in  abatement  aforefaid  faid  that  he  is  not  guilty  as  the  plaintiff  con 
tends,  &  thereof  put  himfelf  on  the  Country,  &  then  the  caufe  was  con 
tinued  to  this  term,  and  now  the  PltfF.  referving  to  herfelf  the  liberty 
of  joining  iflue  on  the  Deft's  plea  aforefaid  in  the  appeal  fays  that 
the  defendant's  plea  aforefaid  is  an  inefficient  anfwer  to  the  Plaintiff's 
declaration  aforefaid  and  by  law  me  is  not  held  to  reply  thereto  &  me 
is  ready  to  verify  wherefore  for  want  of  a  fufficient  anfwer  to  the 
Plaintiff's  declaration  aforefaid  me  prays  judgment  for  her  damages  & 
cofts  &  the  defendant  confenting  to  the  waving  of  the  demurrer  on  the 
appeal  faid  his  plea  aforefaid  is  good  &  becaufe  the  PltfT  refufes  to 
reply  thereto  He  prays  judgment  for  his  coft.  It  is  confidered  by  the' 
Court  that  the  defendant's  plea  in  chief  aforefaid  is  good  &  that  the  faid 
John  Whipple  recover  of  the  faid  Jenny  Slew  cofts  tax  at 
the  Pltff  appealed  to  the  next  Superior  Court  of  Judicature  to  be  holden 
8 


H4  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

for  this  County  &  entered  into  recognizance  with  fureties  as  the  law  di 
rects  for  profecuting  her  appeal  to  effect."  Records  of  Ike.  Inferior 
Court  of  C.  C.  P.,  Vol.  —,  (Sep.  1760  to  July  ij66),page  502. 

"  JENNY  SLEW  of  Ipfwich,  in  the  County  of  EfTex,  Spinfter,  Appel 
lant,  verfus  JOHN  WHIFFLE,  Jr.  of  faid  Ipfwich,  Gentleman  Appellee 
from  the  judgment  of  an  Inferior  Court  of  Common  Pleas  held  at  New- 
buryport  within  and  for  the  County  of  Eflex  on  the  laft  Tuefday  of 
September  1 765  when  and  where  the  appellant  was  plaint.,  and  the  ap 
pellee  was  defendant  in  a  plea  of  trefpafs,  for  that  the  faid  John  upon 
the  zpth  day  of  January,  A.  D.  1762,  at  Ipfwich  aforefaid  with  force 
and  arms  took  her  the  faid  Jenny  held  &  kept  her  in  fervitude  as  a 
flave  in  his  fervice  &  has  reftrained  her  of  her  liberty  from  that  time 
to  the  fifth  of  March  1765  without  any  lawful  right  or  authority  fo  to 
do  &  did  other  injuries  againft  the  Peace  &  to  the  damage  of  the  faid 
Jenny  Slew,  as  me  faith,  the  fum  of  twenty-five  pounds,  at  which  In 
ferior  Court,  judgment  was  rendered  upon  the  demurrer  then  that  the 
faid  John  Whipple  recover  againft  the  faid  Jenny  Slew  cofts.  This 
appeal  was  brought  forward  at  the  Superior  Court  of  Judicature  &c., 
holden  at  Salem,  within  &  for  the  County  of  Eflex  on  the  firft 
Tuesday  of  laft  November,  from  whence  it  was  continued  to  the 
laft  term  of  this  Court  for  this  County  by  confent  &  fo  from  thence 
unto  this  Court,  and  now  both  parties  appeared  &  the  demurrer  afore 
faid  being  waived  by  confent  &  iffue  joined  upon  the  plea  tendered  at 
faid  Inferior  Court  &  on  file.  The  cafe  after  full  hearing  was  com 
mitted  to  a  jury  fworn  according  to  law  to  try  the  fame  who  returned 
their  verdict  therein  upon  oath,  that  is  to  fay,  they  find  for  appellant 
reverfion  of  the  former  judgment  four  pounds  money  damage  &  cofts, 
It's  therefore  confidered  by  the  Court,  that  the  former  judgment  be  re- 
verfed  &  that  the  faid  Slew  recover  againft  the  faid  Whipple  the  fum  of 
four  pounds  lawful  money  of  this  Province  damage  &  cofts  taxed 
9/.  95.  6d. 

"Exon.  iffiied  4  Dec.  1766."  Records  of  the  Superior  Court  of 
Judicature  (Vol.  17  66-7) ,  page  175. 

The  cafe  of  Newport  vs.  Billing  has  been  pre- 
vioufly  noticed,  p.  22,  note.  It  is  not  improbable 
that  this  was  the  cafe  in  which  John  Adams  was  en- 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  115 

gaged,  in  the  latter  part  of  September,  1768,  when  he 
<c  attended  the  Superior  Court  at  Worcester  and  the 
next  week  proceeded  to  Springfield,  where  I  was  acci 
dentally  engaged  in  a  caufe  between  a  negro  and  his 
mafter."  Works,  n.,  213. 

The  next  cafe  was  that  which  has  been  for  more 
than  half  a  century  the  grand  cheval  de  bataille  of  the 
champions  of  the  hiftoric  fame  of  Maffachufetts — the 
cafe  of  James  v.  Lechmere,  in  Middlefex,  in  1769. 
This  is  the  cafe  referred  to  in  a  recent  paper  read 
before  the  Maffachufetts  Hiftorical  Society,  in  which 
the  writer  felt  at  liberty  to  "  indulge  a  pride  equally 
juft  and  generous,  that  here,  in  the  Courts  of  the 
Province,  the  ruling  of  Lord  Mansfield  [in  the  cafe 
of  Somerfet]  was  anticipated  by  two  years,  in  favor 
of  perfonal  freedom  and  human  rights."  M.  H.  S. 
Proc.,  1863-4,  p.  322.  That  is  to  fay,  as  the  fame 
writer  expreffes  it  elfewhere,  in  the  cafe  of  James  v. 
Lechmere,  "  the  right  of  a  mafter  to  hold  a  flave  had 
been  denied,  by  the  Superior  Court  of  Maffachufetts, 
and  upon  the  fame  grounds,  fubftantially,  as  thofe 
upon  which  Lord  Mansfield  difcharged  Somerfet,1 
when  his  cafe  came  before  him."  Wajkbunfs  Judi 
cial  Hift.  of  Mafs.y  202.  Compare  alfo  M.  H.  S. 

1  The  abfurdity  of  the  claim  fet  up  for  Maffachufetts  is  not  diminimed 
by  the  fa&  that  no  cafe  in  the  hiftory  of  Englifh  Law  has  been  more  mis- 
underftood  and  mifreprefented  than  the  Somerfet  cafe  itfelf. 

Thirteen  years  later  (27  April,  1785),  Lord  Mansfield  himfelf  ftated 
expresfly  "  that  his  decifion  went  no  farther  than  that  the  mafter  cannot  by 
force  compel  the  flave  to  go  out  of  the  Kingdom."  At  the  fame  time  he 
alfo  faid,  with  reference  to  the  alleged  extinction  of  villenage,  "  villains  in 
grofs  may  in  point  of  law  fubfift  at  this  day.  But  the  change  of  cuftoms 
and  manners  has  effectually  abolifhed  them  in  point  of  facV'  The  King  v. 
The  Inhabitants  of  Thames  Ditton,  4  Doug.,  300.  In  the  lame  year,  the 


1 1 6  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Proc.,    1855-58,  pp.  190-91,   and  Coll.,   iv.,  iv.,  pp. 

334-5- 

It  is  a  pity  to  difturb  thefe  cherifhed  fancies,  but 

the  truth  is  that  this  cafe,  fo  often  quoted  "  as  having 
determined  the  unlawfulnefs  of  flavery  in  MafTachu- 
fetts,  is  Jhown  by  the  records  and  files  of  Court  to  have 
been  brought  up  from  the  Inferior  Court  by  /ham  demurrer, 
and,  after  one  or  two  continuances,  fettled  by  the  parties. 
Rec.,  1769,  fol.  196."  Gray  in  Quincys  Reports,  30, 
note. 

We  muft  not  omit  to  note  in  paffing  another  in- 
terefting  fad  recently  developed.  James  Somerfet, 
the  fubjedt  of  the  great  Englim  "  fuit  for  liberty/' 
was  not  a  Virginia  or  Weft  India  flave,  as  has  been 

fame  great  exponent  of  Englifh  Law  expresfly  recognized  property  in  (laves 
on  board  a  (lave-trader,  in  an  a6Hon  on  a  policy  of  affurance.  The  demand 
on  the  policy  was  for  the  lofs  of  a  great  many  (laves  by  mutiny.  Jones  vs. 
Schmoll.  i  Term  Reports,  130,  note.  Add  to  all  this  the  notorious  fafts 
that  (laves  were  bought  and  fold  in  England  long  after  the  time  when  it 
has  been  alleged  that  "  Lord  Mansfield  firft  eftablifhed  the  grand  doftrine 
that  the  air  of  England  is  too  pure  to  be  breathed  by  a  (lave  j "  that  it 
was  not  until  1807  that  (he  abolimed  her  (lave-trade,  and  twenty-feven 
weary  years  more  elapfed  before  (he  fet  her  (laves  free  in  her  colonies  ;  and 
we  can,  without  referring  to  the  earlier  hiftory  of  her  royal  and  parliament 
ary,  national  and  individual  patronage  of  flavery  and  the  (lave-trade,  or  her 
cowardly  fympathy  with  the  (laveholders'  rebellion,  eftimate  the  value  of 
Earl  RufTeH's  recent  declaration,  that  Great  Britain  has  always  been  hoftile 
to  (lavery.  "  The  Britifh  nation  have  always  entertained,  and  ftill  entertain, 
the  deepeft  abhorrence  of  laws  by  which  men  of  one  color  were  made 
(laves  of  men  of  another  color.  The  efforts  by  which  the  United  States 
Government  and  Congrefs  have  (haken  off  flavery  have,  therefore,  the 
warmeft  fympathies  of  the  people  of  thefe  Kingdoms."  Earl  Rujfell  to  Mr. 
Adams,  Augufl  20,  1865.  No  language  or  hiftory  within  our  knowledge 
furnishes  fit  epithet  or  parallel  for  fuch  confummate  hypocrify  and  recklefs 
difregard  of  the  truth  of  hiftory.  It  would  be  an  infult  to  the  "  hiftoric 
fame  "  of  that  unhappy  Jewish  fe£l  to  refer  to  the  Pharifees.  Perhaps  it  is 
enough. to  fay  it  is  the  empty  "  palaver"  of  a  British  Prime  Minifter  ! 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  1  1  7 

generally  ftated,  but  a  negro-flave  from  Maflachu- 
fetts  !  where  he  lived  with  his  owner,  Mr.  Charles 
Stewart,  who  held  an  office  in  the  cuftoms  and  refided 
in  Bofton.  Proc.  M.  H.  £.,  1863-64,  p.  323. 

Mr.  Stewart  left  Bofton  on  the  firft  of  October, 
1769,  and  arrived  in  London  on  the  tenth  of  Novem 
ber  following.  He  was  accompanied  by  this  {lave, 
who  continued  in  his  fervice  until  the  firft  of  October, 
1771,  when  he  ran  away.  His  owner  found  means  to 
feize  and  fecure  him,  and  had  placed  him  on  board  a 
veflel  bound  for  Jamaica,  in  the  cuftody  of  the  cap 
tain,  who  was  to  carry  him  there  to  be  fold.  This 
was  on  the  26th  November,  1771.  He  was  refcued 
by  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  and  the  proceedings  in 
the  cafe  terminated  in  his  releafe  on  the  22d  June, 


There  was  a  cafe  in  Nantucket,  about  the  years 
1769-1770,  in  which  Mr.  Rotch,  a  member  of  the 
Society  of  Friends,  received  on  board  a  veflel  called 
the  Friendfhip,  at  that  time  engaged  in  the  whale- 
fifhery,  and  commanded  by  Eliftia  Folger,  a  young 
(lave  by  the  name  of  "  Bofton,"  belonging  to  the  heirs 
of  William  Swain.  At  the  termination  of  the  voy 
age,  he  paid  to  "  Bofton  "  his  proportion  of  the  pro 
ceeds.  The  mafter,  John  Swain,  brought  an  action 
againft  the  captain  of  the  veflel,  in  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas  of  Nantucket,  for  the  recovery  of  his 
{lave  ;  but  the  jury  returned  a  verdict  in  favor  of  the 
defendant,  and  the  {lave  is  faid  to  have  been  "  manu 
mitted  by  the  magiftrates."  Swain  took  an  appeal 
from  this  judgment  to  the  Supreme  Court  at  Bofton, 
but  never  profecuted  it,  Lymaris  Report,  1822. 


n8  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Another  cafe  is  mentioned  in  a  letter  of  Thomas 
Pemberton,  dated  at  Bofton,  March  12,  1795,  in 
reply  to  the  Circular  of  Dr.  Jeremy  Belknap,  dated 
Bofton,  February  17,  1795?  as  follows: 

"  The  firft  inftance  I  have  heard  of  a  negro  re- 
quefting  his  freedom  as  his  right  belonged,  I  am  in 
formed,  to  Dr.  Stockbridge,  of  Hanover,  in  Ply 
mouth  County.  His  mafter  refufed  to  grant  it,  but 
by  afliftance  of  lawyers  he  obtained  it,  this  about  the 
year  1770." 

Mr.  Gray  mentions  the  cafe  of  Cafar  vs.  Taylor, 
in  EfTex,  1772,  in  which  "  the  wife  of  a  flave  was  not 
allowed  to  teftify  againft  him,"  and  "  the  defendant 
in  an  aclion  of  falfe  imprifonment  was  not  permitted 
under  the  general  iffue  to  prove  that  the  plaintiff  was 
his  flave."  ^uincys  Reports,  30,  note. 

In  September  or  October,  1773,  an  action  was 
brought  in  the  Inferior  Court,  in  Effex,  againft 
Richard  Greenleaf,  of  Newburyport,  by  Caefar 
[Hendrick],  a  colored  man,  whom  he  claimed  as  his 
flave,  for  holding  him  in  bondage.  He  laid  the 
damages  at  fifty  pounds.  A  letter  from  Newbury 
port,  October  loth,  fays,  "We  have  lately  had  our 
Court  week  when  the  novel  cafe  of  Caefar  againft  his 
mafter  in  an  action  of  fifty  pounds  lawful  money 
damages  for  detaining  him  in  flavery  was  litigated 
before  a  jury  of  the  County,  who  found  for  the 
plaintiff  eighteen  pounds  damages  and  cq/ls."  .  John 
Lowell,  Efq.,  afterward  Judge  Lowell,  was  counfel  for 
the  plaintiff.  Coffin  s  Newbury,  241,  339. 

Nathan  Dane  notices  this  cafe  in  his  Abridgment 
and  Digeft  of  American  Law.  He  fays: 


Slavery  in  MaJJTachuJetts.  119 

"As  early  as  1773,  many  negroes  claimed  their 
freedom,  and  brought  actions  of  trefpafs  againft  their 
mailers  for  reftraining  them.  A.  D.  1773,  one  Csefar 
brought  trefpafs  againft  his  mafter,  and  declared  that 
he,  with  force  and  arms,  aflaulted  the  plaintiff  and 
imprifoned  him,  and  fo  with  force  and  arms  againft 
the  plaintiff's  will,  hath  there  held,  kept,  and  re- 
ftrained  him  in  fervitude,  as  the  faid  G.'s  flave,  for  fo 
long  a  time,  etc. 

"  In  this  cafe  the  mafter  protefted  the  plaintiff  was 
his  mulatto  Jlave,  and  that  he,  the  mafter,  was  not  held 
by  law  to  anfwer  him ;  but  for  plea  the  mafter  faid  he 
was  not  guilty.  The  parties  agreed  any  fpecial  matter 
might  be  given  in  evidence,  etc.  Counfel,  Farnham 
and  Lowell."  Danes  Abridgment,  n.,  426. 

Another  cafe  is  mentioned  as  "  brought  on  at  the 
Inferior  Court  of  Common  Pleas  for  the  County  of 
Effex  for  July  term  [1774],  between  Mr.  Caleb 
Dodge  of  Beverly,  and  his  negro  fervant,  in  which  the 
referees  gave  a  verdict  in  favor  of  the  negro,  by  which 
he  obtained  his  freedom,  there  being  no  law  of  the 
province  to  hold  a  man  to  ferve  for  life."  The  Watch 
man  s  Alarm,  etc.,  p.  28,  note.  Yet  the  writer  of  this 
pamphlet  fuggefted  the  cc  abolifhing  of  this  vile 
cuftom  of  flave-making,  either  by  a  law  of  the  prov 
ince,  Common  Law,  (which  I  am  told  has  happily 
fucceeded  in  many  inftances  of  late)  or  by  a  voluntary 
releafement."  Ibid.,  p.  27. 

Mr.  Dane  alfo  refers  to  the  cafe  of  C^far  vs. 
Taylor,  and  gives  the  following  view  of  the  fubjecl 
generally : 

"In  thefe  cafes  there  feem  to  have  been  doubts 


I2O  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

if  flavery  exifted  in  Maffachufetfcs  ;  the  caufes  were 
generally  argued  on  general  principles  ;  the  matters 
urged,  in  fupport  of  flavery,  the  practice  of  ancient  and 
fome  modern  nations  ;  alfo  the  Provincial  Statutes  of 
10  W.  3.3  ch.  6. ;  i  &  2  Anne,  ch.  2.;  and  4  &  5 
Anne,  ch.  6. 

"  The  plain  tiffs  argued  that  by  Englifh  Law, 
Jlavery  could  not  exift,  and  that  we  had  nothing  to  do 
with  any  other,  except  the  Provincial  Statutes  ;  that 
if  thefe  eftabliftied  flavery,  it  was  merely  by  implication, 
and  that  natural  liberty  was  never  to  be  taken  away 
by  implication  ;  that  at  common  law  partus  nonjequitur 
ventremy  though  it  might  be  otherwife  by  the  civil 
law,  which  England,  in  this  cafe,  had  never  adopted ; 
that  marriage  and  providing  for  children  was  a  right 
and  a  duty  which  only  free  perfons  could  perform ; 
that  the  Gofpel  forbid  men  to  fell  their  brethren ;  and 
that  the  plaintiffs  were  Chriftians,  and,  if  held  in 
flavery,  could  not  perform  their  Chriftian  duties  ;  that 
even  villainage  is  abolifhed  by  Englifh  law,  and  that 
the  common  law  abhorred  flavery.  But  it  was  ad 
mitted  by  the  plaintiff's  counfel,  that  flavery  might 
be  eftabliflied  by  exprefs  law ;  and  the  defendants 
urged,  and  it  feems  long  to  have  been  underftood,  that 
the  Provincial  Statutes  did  expreffly  recognize  and  es- 
tablifh  flavery,  as  in  the  cafes  above  ftated,  and  in 
many  others. 

"In  1773,  etc.,  fome  flaves  did  recover  againft  their 
matters ;  but  thefe  cafes  are  no  evidence  that  there 
could  not  be  flaves  in  the  Province,  for  fometimes 
matters  permitted  their  flaves  to  recover  to  get  clear 
of  maintaining  them  as  paupers  when  old  and  infirm ; 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  121 

the  effect,  as  then  generally  underftood,  of  a  judgment 
againft  the  mafter  on  this  point  of  flavery ;  hence,  a 
very  feeble  defence  was  often  made  by  the  matters, 
efpecially  when  fued  by  the  old  or  infirm  flaves,  as  the 
matters  could  not  even  manumit  their  (laves,  without 
indemnifying  their  towns  againft  their  maintenance,  as 
town  paupers."  Dane  s  Abridgment,  11.,  426-7. 

Chief-Juftice  Parfons  alfo,  in  the  cafe  of  Winchen- 
don  vs.  Hatfield  in  error,  confirms  this  view. 

cc  Several  negroes,  born  in  this  country  of  im 
ported  flaves  demanded  their  freedom  of  their  matters 
by  fuit  at  law,  and  obtained  it  by  a  judgment  of  court. 
The  defence  of  the  mafter  was  feebly  made,  for  fuch 
was  the  temper  of  the  times,  that  a  reftlefs  difcontented 
flave  was  worth  little  ;  and  when  his  freedom  was  ob 
tained  in  a  courfe  of  legal  proceedings,  the  mafter  was 
not  holden  for  his  future  fupport,  if  he  became  poor." 
iv  Mafs.  Reports,  128. 

The  reference  by  the  Chief-Juftice  to  the  circum- 
ftance  that  thefe  negroes  litigant  were  "  born  in  this 
country,"  points  to  the  queftion,  whether  hereditary 
flavery  was  legal  in  MafTachufetts  ?  which  is  alfo 
touched  in  the  previous  reference  by  the  counfel  for 
the  flaves,  as  ftated  by  Mr.  Dane,  to  the  difference 
between  the  rules  of  the  Common  Law  and  the  Civil 
Law. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Belknap,  in  his  account  of  thefe  fuits, 
fays,  "  On  the  part  of  the  blacks  it  was  pleaded,  that 
the  royal  charter  expreffly  declared  all  perfons  born  or 
refiding  in  the  province,  to  be  as  free  as  the  King's 
fubjects  in  Great  Britain  ;  that  by  the  laws  of  Eng 
land,  no  man  could  be  deprived  of  his  liberty  but  by 


122  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 

the  judgment  of  his  peers  ;  that  the  laws  of  the  prov 
ince  respecting  an  evil  exifting,  and  attempting  to 
mitigate  or  regulate  it,  did  not  authorize  it ;  and,  on 
fome  occaflons,  the  plea  was,  that  though  the  flavery 
of  the  parents  be  admitted,  yet  no  difability  of  that 
kind  could  defcend  to  children."  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,,  i., 
iv.,  203. 

How  far  the  arguments  here  noticed  were  urged 
in  thefe  various  fuits,  and  whether  in  any  of  them 
thefe  points  were  judicially  ftated  and  determined,  we 
are  unable  to  fay.  We  have  previoufly  examined  the 
legal  hiftory  of  hereditary  flavery  in  Maflachufetts  ; 
and  it  may  be  proper  in  this  connection  to  add  fome- 
thing  with  refpect  to  the  other  pleas  mentioned  by 
Belknap.  And  firft,  the  alleged  rights  of  the  Indians 
and  Negroes  under  the  royal  charter,  and  laws  of 
England.  The  proviflon  referred  to  is  fubftantially 
the  fame  in  both  Colony  and  Province  charters,  and 
is  in  the  words  following,  viz : 

"  That  all  and  every  of  the  fubjects  of  us,  our 
heirs  and  fucceflbrs,  which  go  to  and  inhabit  within 
our  faid  province  and  territory,  and  every  of  their 
children  which  fliall  happen  to  be  born  there,  or  on 
the  feas  in  going  thither,  or  returning  from  thence, 
fhall  have  and  enjoy  all  liberties  and  immunities  of 
free  and  natural  fubjects  within  the  dominions  of  us, 
our  heirs  and  fucceflbrs,  to  all  intents,  conftructions, 
and  purpofes  whatfoever,  as  if  they  and  every  of  them 
were  born  within  our  realm  of  England." 

The  preamble  to  the  Body  of  Liberties  in  1641, 
which  declares  the  civil  privileges  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  Colony,  might  alfo  have  been  referred  to  in  this 


y 

Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  123 

line  of  argument.  Still,  it  is  a  hiftorical  fad  that  the 
guaranties  of  the  royal  charters,  and  the  Common  Law 
of  England  as  a  perfonal  law  of  privilege,  did  not  ex 
tend  to  Aliens,  Negroes,  or  Indians'.1 

The  other  plea,  "  that  the  laws  of  the  province 
refpecting  an  evil  exifting,  and  attempting  to  mitigate 
or  regulate  it  did  not  authorize  it,"  could  avail  no 
thing  againft  the  other  ftern  hiftorical  fact  that  flavery 
exifted  in  MafTachufetts  "by  virtue  and  equity  of  an 
exprefs  Law  of  the  Country  warranting  the  fame, 
eftablimed  by  a  General  Court,  and  fufficiently  pub- 
limed  ;  or  in  cafe  of  the  defect  of  a  Law  in  any  par 
ticular  cafe,  by  the  word  of  God,  .  .  .  to  be  judged  by 
the  General  Court."  Was  it  faid  that  the  colony-law 
was  annulled  with  the  Charter,  by  the  authority  of 
which  it  was  made  ?  Still  the  ufage  had  prevailed  and 
acquired  force  as  the  common  law  of  the  Province. 
The  validity  of  the  judgment  againft  the  Charter  in 
1684,  which  was  denied  by  the  Houfe  of  Commons, 
and  cc  queftioned  by  very  great  authority  in  England," 
was  never  admitted  in  Maflachufetts.  9  Gray,  $iy. 
There  was  nothing  in  the  repeal  of  the  Colony  charter 
to  affect  the  private  rights  of  the  colonifts.  Ibid.,  518. 
And  generally  the  rights  of  the  inhabitants,  as  well  as 
the  penalties  to  which  they  might  be  fubjeded,  con 
tinued  to  be  determined  by  the  effect  and  according  to 
the  form  of  the  colonial  and  provincial  legiflation, 
i.  e.  the  common  law  of  Maflachufetts,  rather  than  by 

1  See  Kurd's  Lanu  of  Freedom  and  Bondage  in  the  United  States,  VoL 
I.,  pp.  196,  197,  201  :  a  perfeft  treafure-houfe  of  law  and  hiftory  on  its 
fubjeft,  for  which  every  ftudent  of  American  Hiftory  owes  him  a  large 
debt  of  gratitude. 


124  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

the  ancient  common  law  of  England.  5  Pickering,  203. 
7  Cujhing,  76,  77.  13  Pickering,  258.  13  Met  calf, 
68-72. 

But  whatever  'may  have  been  the  pleas  or  argu 
ments  in  thefe  fuits,  or  the  opinions  which  influenced 
their  various  refults ;  the  fact  remains  that,  although 
"  the  bonds  of  flavery  "  may  have  been  "  loofened  " 
by  thefe  proceedings,  and  "  the  verdicts  of  juries  in 
favor  of  liberty,"  the  legal  effect  of  fuch  verdicts 
reached  none  but  the  parties  immediately  concerned ; 
and  the  inflitution  of  flavery  continued  to  be  recog 
nized  by  law  in  MafTachufetts,  defying  all  direct 
attempts  to  deftroy  it. 

The  queftion  however  had  been  raifed,  and  flavery 
was  challenged.  Dr.  Belknap  fays,  that  cc  the  con- 
troverfy  began  about  the  year  1766."  M.  H.  S. 
Coll.  i.,  iv.,  201.  We  fhall  endeavor  to  indicate  the 
principal  features  of  its  progrefs  in  their  juft  relations, 
without  difparagement  and  without  exaggeration. 

The  town  of  Worcester,  by  inftructions  in  1765, 
required  their  reprefentative  to  "  ufe  his  influence  to 
obtain  a  law  to  put  an  end  to  that  unchriftian  and  im 
politic  practice  of  making  flaves  of  the  human  fpecies, 
and  that  he  give  his  vote  for  none  to  ferve  in  His 
Majefly's  Council,  who  will  ufe  their  influence  againft 
fuch  a  law/'  Eoflon  News-Letter,  June  4,  1765, 
quoted  by  Buckingham,  Newfpaper  Literature,  i.,  31. 

The  town  of  Bofton,  in  May,  1766,  intruded 
their  Reprefentatives  as  follows,  viz.  :  "  And  for  the 
total  abolifhing  of  flavery  among  us,  that  you  move 
for  a  law  to  prohibit  the  importation  and  the  pur- 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  125 

chasing  of  (laves  for  the  future."      Lyman's  Report, 
1822. 

This  action  was  confirmed  by  a  new  vote  in  the 
following  year.  At  the  Town-  Meet  ing  on  the  i6th 
of  March,  1767,  the  queftion  came  up,  as  to  whether 
the  Town  would  adhere  to  that  part  of  its  Inftruc- 
tions,  and  it  paffed  in  the  affirmative.1  Drakes 
Bofton,  728-9.  It  is  alfo  faid,  though  probably 
true  of  a  later  period  only,  that  "In  fome  of  the 
country  towns  they  voted  to  have  no  flaves  among 
them,  and  that  their  matters  be  indemnified  from  any 
expence,  [after  they  had  granted  them  freedom]  that 
might  arife  by  reafon  of  their  age,  infirmities,  or  in 
ability  to  fupport  themfelves."  Letter  of  Mr.  Thomas 
P  ember  ton  to  Dr.  Jeremy  Belknap,  Bo/ton,  Mch.  12, 


In  1767,  an  anonymous  trad:  of  twenty  octavo 
pages  againft  flavery  made  its  appearance.  It  was 
entitled  cc  Confederations  on  Slavery,  in  a  Letter  to  a 
Friend"  It  was  written  by  Nathaniel  Appleton,  a 
merchant  of  Bofton,  afterwards  a  member  of  the  firft 
Committee  of  Correfpondence  and  a  zealous  patriot 
during  the  Revolutionary  druggie.  Appleton  Me 
morial^  360 

On  March  2d,  1769,  the  reverend  Samuel  Web- 
fter  of  Salifbury,  Maflachufetts,  publifhed  "  an  earned 
addrefs  to  my  country  on  flavery."  An  extract  is 
given  by  Mr.  Coffin  in  his  Hiftory  of  Newbury,  p. 

338- 

1  The  reader  will  note  the  coincidence  of  this  proceeding  with  that  in 
the  Legiflature  on  the  fame  day,  when  it  was  "  Ordered,  that  the  Matter 
fubfide"  See/>o/2,  />.  127. 


126  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

James  Swan,  "  a  Scotfman,"  and  merchant  in 
Bofton,  publifhed  "  A  Difluafion  to  Great  Britain 
and  the  Colonies,  from  the  Slave-Trade  to  Africa — 
mewing  the  Injuflice  thereof,  etc."  It  feems  to  have 
been  in  cc  the  form  of  a  fermon,"  and  the  writer  was 
apparently  better  fatisfied  with  a  fecond  edition  revifed 
and  abridged,  which  he  put  forth  in  1773,  at  the 
earneft  defire  of  the  Negroes  in  Bofton,  in  order  to 
anfwer  the  purpofe  of  fending  a  copy  to  each  town. 

In  1767,  the  firft  movement  was  made  in  the 
Legiflature  to  procure  the  paflage  of  an  act  againft  fla- 
very  and  the  flave-trade. 

On  the  ijth  March,  a  bill  was  brought  into  the 
Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  cc  to  prevent  the  unwarrant 
able  and  unufual  Practice  or  Cuftom  of  inflaving  Man 
kind  in  this  Province,  and  the  importation  of  flaves 
into  the  fame."  It  was  read  a  firft  time,  and  the 
queftion  was  moved,  whether  a  fecond  reading  be 
referred  to  the  next  feflion  of  the  General  Court  ? 
which  was  pafled  in  the  negative.  Then  it  was  moved, 
that  a  claufe  be  brought  into  the  bill,  for  a  limitation 
to  a  certain  time,  and  the  queftion  being  put,  it 
pafled  in  the  affirmative ;  and  it  was  further  ordered, 
that  the  bill  be  read  again  on  the  following  day,  at  ten 
o'clock.  Journal,  387. 

On  the  i4th,  the  bill  ccto  prevent  the  unwarrant 
able  and  unnatural  Practice,"  etc.,  was  read  a  fecond 
time,  and  the  queftion  was  put  whether  the  third 
reading  be  referred  to  the  next  May  feflion  ?  This 
pafled  in  the  negative,  and  it  was  ordered  that  the  Bill 
be  read  a  third  time  on  Monday  next  at  three  o'clock. 
Ibid.,  390. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  127 

On  the  i6th,  "The  Bill  for  preventing  the  un 
natural  and  unwarrantable  Cuftom  of  enflaving  Man 
kind  in  this  Province,  and  the  Importation  of  Slaves 
into  the  Same,  was  Read  according  to  order,  and, 
after  a  Debate, 

"  Ordered  that  the  Matter  fubftde,  and  that  Capt. 
Sheaffe,  Col.  Richmond,  and  Col.  Bourne,  be  a  Com 
mittee  to  bring  in  a  Bill  for  laying  a  Duty  of  Import 
on  Slaves  importing  into  this  Province."  Ibld.^  393. 

On  the  i yth,  a  Bill  for  laying  a  Duty  of  Import 
upon  the  Importation  of  Slaves  into  this  Province 
was  read  a  firft  and  fecond  time,  and  ordered  for  a 
third  reading  on  the  next  day  at  eleven  o'clock.  Ibid., 
408. 

On  the  1 8th,  "the  bill  for  laying  an  Import  on 
the  Importation  of  Negro  and  other  Slaves,  was  read 
a  third  time,  and  the  queftion  was  put,  whether  the 
enacting  this  bill  mould  be  referred  to  the  next  May 
feflion,  that  the  Minds  of  the  Country  may  be  known 
thereupon  ?  Pafled  in  the  Negative.  Then  the  Ques 
tion  was  put,  Whether  a  claufe  fhall  be  bro't  in  to 
limit  the  Continuance  of  the  Act  to  the  Term  of  one 
year  ?  Faffed  in  the  Affirmative,  and  Ordered,  that 
the  Bill  be  recommitted."  Ibid.y  411.  In  the  after 
noon  of  the  fame  day,  the  bill  was  read  with  the 
amendment,  and  having  parTed  to  be  engrofled,  was 
"  fent  up  by  Col.  Bowers,  Col.  Gerrim,  Col.  Leonard, 
Capt.  Thayer,  and  Col.  Richmond."  Ibid.,  411. 

The  bill  was  read  a  firft  time  in  the  Council  on  the 
1 9th  of  March,  and  on  the  2oth  was  read  a  fecond 
time  and  pafTed  to  be  engrofled  "  as  taken  into  a  new 
draft."  On  being  fent  down  to  the  Houfe  of  Repre- 


128  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 

fentatives  for  concurrence,  in  the  afternoon  of  the 
fame  day,  it  was  cc  Read  and  unanimoufly  non-con 
curred,  and  the  Houfe  adhere  to  their  own  Vote. 
Sent  up  for  concurrence."  Ibid.  Compare  Gen.  Court 
Records,  May  1763  to  May  1767,^.  485. 

And  thus  the  bill  difappeared  and  was  loft.  It 
was  the  neareft  approach  to  an  attempt  to  abolifh 
flavery,  within  our  knowledge,  in  all  the  Colonial  and 
Provincial  legislation  of  MafTachufetts.  The  bills 
againft  the  importation  of  (laves  cannot  juftly  be  re 
garded  as  direct  attempts  to  abolim  the  inftitution  of 
flavery,  whatever  may  have  been  the  motives  which 
influenced  the  action  concerning  them.  The  bill 
itfelf  of  1767  has  not  been  found,  and  it  is  not  un 
likely  that  its  provifions  may  have  been  lefs  pofitive 
and  ftringent  than  its  title,  which  is  the  chief  author 
ity  for  what  little  anti-flavery  reputation  it  enjoys. 
Could  it  be  recovered,  it  might  illuminate  the  record 
we  have  given,  and  throw  much  light  on  the  fubject 
generally.  It  is  apparent  from  the  record  that  what 
ever  may  have  been  the  height  to  which  the  zeal  of 
anti-flavery  had  carried  the  agitation  of  the  fubject  on 
this  occaflon,  it  was  duly  "  ordered,  that  the  Matter 
fubflde ;" 1  so  that  it  was  only  an  Impoft  Act  which 
finally  tried  to  ftruggle  forth  into  exiftence,  and 
periflied  in  the  effort.  If  indeed  it  was  an  attempt 
at  abolition,  the  failure  was  fo  flgnal  and  decifive  that 
it  was  not  renewed  until  ten  years  afterward,  when,  as 
we  fliall  fee,  it  failed  again. 

1  The  reader  will  fee  hereafter,  in  the  frequent  ufe  of  this  parliamentary 
phrafe  by  the  Legiflature  of  MafTachufetts,  that  an  order  to  "fub/ide  "  con 
tinued  to  be  their  favorite  method  of  reducing  anti-flavery  inflammation. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  129 

That  terror  of  infurrection,  To  often  and  aptly 
illuftrated  in  the  common  phrafe  of  cc  fleeping  over  a 
volcano,"  that  continuous  and  awful  dread  which 
confcious  tyranny  feels,  but  hates  to  acknowledge,  we 
have  already  faid,  was  not  unknown  even  in  MafTa- 
chufetts,  where  the  fervile  clafs  was  always  a  com 
paratively  fmall  element  of  the  population.  In  times 
of  civil  commotion  and  popular  excitement,  the 
danger  was  more  imminent,  and  the  fear  was  more 
freely  exprefled. 

During  the  difficulties  between  the  people  of  the 
town  of  Bofton  and  the  Britim  foldiers  in  1768,  John 
Wilfon,  a  captain  in  the  59th  Regiment,  was  accufed 
of  exciting  the  flaves  againft  their  matters,  afluring 
them  that  the  foldiers  had  come  to  procure  their  free 
dom  ;  and  that,  "  with  their  afliftance,  they  mould 
be  able  to  drive  the  Liberty  Boys  to  the  devil."  He 
was  arrefted  on  the  complaint  of  the  felectmen,  and 
was  bound  over  for  trial ;  "  but,  owing  to  the  manoeu 
vres  of  the  Attorney-General,  the  indictment  was 
quafhed,  and  Wilfon  left  the  Province  about  the  fame 
time."  Drake  s  Bofton,  754. 

There  was  a  fimilar  alarm  in  September,  1774.  It 
is  noticed  in  one  of  the  letters  of  Mrs.  John  Adams 
to  her  hufband,  dated  at  Bofton  Garrifon,  22d  Sep 
tember,  1774. 

cc  There  has  been  in  town  a  confpiracy  of  the 
negroes.  At  prefent  it  is  kept  pretty  private,  and 
was  difcovered  by  one  who  endeavored  to  difluade 
them  from  it.  He  being  threatened  with  his  life, 
applied  to  Juftice  Quincy  for  protection.  They  con 
ducted  in  this  way,  got  an  Irifhman  to  draw  up  a  pe- 
9 


130  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

tition  to  the  Governor  [Gage],  telling  him  they  would 
fight  for  him  provided  he  would  arm  them,  and  en 
gage  to  liberate  them  if  he  conquered.  And  it  is  faid 
that  he  attended  fo  much  to  it,  as  to  confult  Percy * 
upon  it,  and  one  Lieutenant  Small  has  been  very  bufy 
and  active.  There  is  but  little  faid,  and  what  fteps 
they  will  take  in  confequence  of  it  I  know  not.  I 
wifh  moft  fincerely  there  was  not  a  (lave  in  the  prov 
ince  ;  it  always  appeared  a  moft  iniquitous  fcheme  to 
me  to  fight  ourfelves  for  what  we  are  daily  robbing 
and  plundering  from  thofe  who  have  as  good  a  right 
to  freedom  as  we  have.  You  know  my  mind  upon 
this  fubjecV  Adams  Letters,  i.,  24. 

In  1771,  the  fubject  of  the  Slave-Trade  was  again 
introduced  into  the  Legiflature.  On  the  I2th  April, 
in  that  year,  a  bill  "  to  prevent  the  Importation  of 
Slaves  from  Africa"  was  read  the  firfl  time  and 
ordered  to  a  fecond  reading  on  the  following  day  at 
ten  o'clock.  Journal,  211.  On  the  ijth,,  the  bill 
was  read  the  fecond  time,  and  the  further  confideration 
was  postponed  till  the  following  Tuefday  morning. 
Ibid.,  215.  On  the  i6th  the  bill  was  re-committed. 
Ibid.,  219. 

On  the  1 9th,  a  "  Bill  to  prevent  the  Importation 
of  Negro  Slaves  into  this  Province"  was  read  the 
firft  time  and  ordered  a  fecond  reading  "  to-morrow 
at  eleven  o'clock."  Ibid.,  234.  On  the  2oth,  it  was 
"  read  a  fecond  time  and  ordered  to  be  read  again  on 
Monday  next,  at  Three  o'clock."  On  the  22d,  it 

1  Brigadier-General  the  Right  Honorable  Hugh,  Earl  Percy,  after 
wards  Duke  of  Northumberland,  was  Colonel  of  the  5th  Regiment,  or 
Northumberland  Fufileers,  at  that  time  (rationed  in  Bofton. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  131 

was  read  the  third  time,  and  patted  to  be  engrofled. 
Ibid.,  236.  On  the  24th,  it  was  read  and  patted  to  be 
enadted.  Ibid.,  240. 

It  was  duly  fent  to  the  Council  for  concurrence, 
and  on  the  fame  day,  "  James  Otis,  Efq.,  came  down 
from  the  honorable  Board,  to  propofe  an  Amendment 
on  the  engrofled  bill  for  preventing  the  Importation 
of  Slaves  from  Africa,  and  laid  the  Bill  on  the  Table ;" 
whereupon  cc  The  Houfe  took  the  propofed  Amend 
ment  into  consideration,  and  concur' d  with  the  honor 
able  Board  therein,  then  the  Bill  was  fent  up  to  the 
honorable  Board."  Ibid.,  242-3. 

We  have  been  unable  to  procure  any  record  of 
the  doings  of  the  Council  on  the  fubject,  excepting 
the  following  entry  in  the  Records  of  the  General 
Court : 

"  Wednefday,  April  24,  1771,  etc.  etc.  An  En 
grofled  Bill  intituled  c  An  Ad:  to  prevent  the  Im 
portation  of  Negro  Slaves  into  this  Province '  having 
patted  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  to  be  Enacted. 
In  Council,  Read  a  third  time  and  patted  a  con 
currence  to  be  enacted." 

This  act  failed  to  obtain  the  approval  of  Governor 
Hutchinfon,  and  we  are  fortunately  able  to  prefent 
his  views  on  the  fubject,  as  communicated  to  Lord 
Hillfborough,  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies,  in 
a  letter  dated  May,  1771. 

cc  The  Bill  which  prohibited  the  importation  of 
Negro  Slaves  appeared  to  me  to  come  within  his 
Majefty's  Inftruction  to  Sir  Francis  Bernard,  which 
reftrains  the  Governor  from  Aflenting  to  any  Laws 
of  a  new  and  unufual  nature.  I  doubted  befides 


132  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

whether  the  chief  motive  to  this  Bill  which,  it  is  faid, 
was  a  fcruple  upon  the  minds  of  the  People  in  many 
parts  of  the  Province  of  the  lawfulnefs,  in  a  meerly 
moral  refpect,  of  fo  great  a  reftraint  of  Liberty,  was 
well  founded,  flavery  by  the  Provincial  Laws  giving 
no  right  to  the  life  of  the  fervant  and  a  flave  here  con- 
fidered  as  a  Servant  would  be  who  had  bound  him- 
felf  for  a  term  of  years  exceeding  the  ordinary  term 
of  human  life,  and  I  do  not  know  that  it  has  been  de 
termined  he  may  not  have  a  Property  in  Goods,  not- 
withftanding  he  is  called  a  Slave. 

"  I  have  reafon  to  think  that  thefe  three 1  bills  will 
be  again  offered  to  me  in  another  Semon,  I  having  in 
timated  that  I  would  tranfmit  them  to  England  that  I 
might  know  his  Majefty's  pleafure  concerning  them." 
27  Mqfs.  Archives,  159-60. 

Thefe  are  interefting  and  important  fuggeftions.  It 
is  apparent  that  at  this  time  there  was  no  fpecial 
inftruction  to  the  royal  governor  of  Maffachufetts, 
forbidding  his  approval  of  acts  againft  the  Have-trade, 
flutchinfon  evidently  doubted  the  genuinenefs  of  the 
cc  chief  motive  "  which  was  alleged  to  be  the  infpira- 
tion  of  the  bill,  the  "  meerly  moral "  fcruple  againft 
flavery ;  but  his  reafonings  furnifh  a  ftriking  illuftra- 
tion  of  the  changes  which  were  going  on  in  public 
opinion,  and  the  gradual  softening  of  the  harftier 
features  of  flavery  under  their  influence.  The  non 
importation  agreements  throughout  the  Colonies,  by 
which  America  was  trying  to  thwart  the  commercial 
felfiflinefs  of  her  rapacious  Mother,  had  rendered  the 

1  The  other  two  bills  were  a  Marine  Corporation  Bill  and  a  Salem 
Militia  Bill. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  133 

provincial  viceroys  peculiarly  fenfitive  to  the  flighted: 
manifeftation  of  a  difpofition  to  approach  the  facred 
precincts  of  thofe  prerogatives  by  which  King  and 
Parliament  aflumed  to  bind  their  diftant  dependencies  : 
and  the  "  fpirit  of  non-importation "  which  Mafla- 
chufetts  had  imperfectly  learned  from  New  York  was 
equally  offensive  to  them,  whether  it  interfered  with 
their  cherifhed  "  trade  with  Africa,"  or  their  favorite 
monopolies  elfewhere. 

In  1773,  ^e  attempt  to  difcourage  the  flave-trade 
was  renewed.  The  reprefentatives  from  Salem  had 
been  inftrudted,  May  18,  1773,  to  ufe  their  exertions 
to  prevent  the  importation  of  negroes  into  Maflachu- 
fetts  "  as  repugnant  to  the  natural  rights  of  mankind, 
and  highly  prejudicial  to  the  Province."  Felt,  An 
nals,  ii.,  416.  The  town  of  Medford  alfo  directed 
their  member  to  "  ufe  his  utmoft  influence  to  have  a 
final  period  put  to  that  mod  cruel,  inhuman  and  un- 
chriftian  practice,  the  flave-trade."  Swans  Diffuafton9 
etc.y  Revifed  Ed.y  1773,  p.  x.  The  town  of  Leicefter, 
May  19,  1773,  inftructed  their  reprefentative  on  this 
fubject,  as  follows : 

"  And,  as  we  have  the  higheft  regard  for  (fo  as  even 
to  revere  the  name  of)  liberty,  we  cannot  behold  but 
with  the  greateft  abhorrence  any  of  our  fellow  crea 
tures  in  a  ttate  of  flavery. 

"Therefore  we  ftrictly  enjoin  you  to  ufe  your  ut 
moft  influence  that  a  flop  may  be  put  to  the  flave- 
trade  by  the  inhabitants  of  this  Province ;  which,  we 
apprehend,  may  be  effected  by  one  of  thefe  two  ways  : 
either  by  laying  a  heavy  duty  on  every  negro  im 
ported  or  brought  from  Africa  or  elfewhere  into  this 


1 34  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Province;  or,  by  making  a  law,  that  every  negro 
brought  or  imported  as  aforefaid  mould  be  a  free  man 
or  woman  as  foon  as  they  come  within  the  jurifdic- 
tion  of  it ;  and  that  every  negro  child  that  mail  be 
born  in  faid  government  after  the  enacting  fuch  law 
mould  be  free  at  the  fame  age  that  the  children  of 
white  people  are;  and,  from  the  time  of  their  birth  till 
they  are  capable  of  earning  their  living,  to  be  main 
tained  by  the  town  in  which  they  are  born,  or  at  the 
expenfe  of  the  Province,  as  mail  appear  moft  reafon- 
able. 

"  Thus,  by  enacting  fuch  a  law,  in  procefs  of  time 
will  the  blacks  become  free;  or,  if  the  Honorable 
Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  mall  think  of  a  more 
eligible  method,  A'e  mall  be  heartily  glad  of  it.  But 
whether  you  can  juftly  take  away  or  free  a  negro  from 
his  mafter,  who  fairly  purchafed  him,  and  (although 
illegally  ;  for  fuch  is  the  purchafe  of  any  perfon  againrt 
their  confent,  unlefs  it  be  for  a  capital  offence)  which 
the  cuftom  of  this  country  has  juftified  him  in,  we 
mall  not  determine ;  but  hope  that  unerring  Wifdom 
will  direct  you  in  this  and  in  all  your  other  important 
undertakings/*  Waftiburn  s  Leicefter,  442. 

The  town  of  Sandwich,  in  Barnftable  County, 
voted,  May  18,  1773,  "that  our  reprefentative  is  in- 
ftructed  to  endeavor  to  have  an  Act  parled  by  the 
Court,  to  prevent  the  importation  of  Jlaves  into  this 
country,  and  that  all  children  that  mall  be  born  of 
fuch  Africans  as  are  now  flaves  among  us,  mall,  after 
fuch  Act,  be  free  at  21  years  of  age."  Freeman  s  His 
tory  of  Cape  Coo7,  n.,  114. 

There  may  have  been  other  towns  in  which  fimilar 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  135 

meafures  were  taken  to  influence  the  action  of  the 
Legiflature,  but  we  have  no  knowledge  of  any  beyond 
thofe  already  noticed.  The  negroes  themfelves  alfo 
began  to  move  in  the  matter,  encouraged  by  the 
"  fpirit  of  liberty  which  was  rife  in  the  land." 

On  the  25th  June,  1773,  in  the  afternoon  feflion 
of  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  a  petition  was  read 
"  of  Felix  Holbrook,  and  others,  Negroes,  praying 
that  they  may  be  liberated  from  a  State  of  Bondage, 
and  made  Freemen  of  this  Community  ;  and  that  this 
Court  would  give  and  grant  to  them  fome  part  of  the 
unimproved  Lands  belonging  to  the  Province,  for  a 
Settlement,  or  relieve  them  in  fuch  other  Way  as 
{hall  feem  good  and  wife  upon  the  Whole."  Upon 
this  it  was  cc  ordered,  that  Mr.  Hancock,  Mr.  Green- 
leaf,  Mr.  Adams,  Capt.  Dix,  Mr.  Paine,  Capt.  Heath, 
and  Mr.  Pickering  coniider  this  Petition,  and  report 
what  may  be  proper  to  be  done."  Journal,  p.  85. 

This  "  Committee  on  the  Petition  of  Felix  Hol 
brook,  and  others,  in  behalf  of  themfelves  and  others  ; 
praying  to  be  liberated  from  a  State  of  Slavery,  re 
ported"  on  the  28th  June,  1773,  P.M.,  "that  the 
further  Confideration  of  the  Petition  be  referred  till 
next  Seflion,"  and  it  was  fo  referred  accordingly. 
Ibid.,  94. 

Among  other  indications  of  the  growing  intereft  in 
the  fubject,  is  the  fact  that  at  the  annual  commence 
ment  of  Harvard  College,  Cambridge,  July  21,  1773, 
a  forenfic  difputation  on  the  legality  of  enflaving  the 
Africans  was  held  by  two  candidates  for  the  bachelor's 
degree ;  namely,  Theodore  Parfons  and  Eliphalet 
Pearfon,  both  of  whom  were  natives  of  Newbury* 


136  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

The  queftion  was  "whether  the  flavery,  to  which 
Africans  are  in  this  province,  by  the  permiflion  of  law, 
fubjedted,  be  agreeable  to  the  law  of  nature  ?"  The 
work  was  publifhed  at  Bofton,  the  fame  year,  in  an 
oclavo  pamphlet  of  forty-eight  pages.  Coffin  s  New- 
bury,  339. 

The  following  letter  alfo  mows  that  the  bufinefs 
before  the  Legiflature  was  not  wholly  neglected  or  for 
gotten  during  the  interval  between  the  feffions. 

SAMUEL  ADAMS  TO  JOHN  PICKERING,  JR. 

"Bofton,  Jan7.  8,  1774. 

"Sir, 

"  As  the  General  Aflembly  will  undoubtedly  meet 
on  the  26th  of  this  month,  the  Negroes  whofe  petition 
lies  on  file,  and  is  referred  for  confi deration,  are  very 
felicitous  for  the  Event  of  it,  and  having  been  in 
formed  that  you  intended  to  confider  it  at  your 
leifure  Hours  in  the  Recefs  of  the  Court,  they  ear- 
neftly  wifh  you  would  compleat  a  Plan  for  their  Re 
lief.  And  in  the  meantime,  if  it  be  not  too  much 
Trouble,  they  afk  it  as  a  favor  that  you  would  by 
a  Letter  enable  me  to  communicate  to  them  the 
general  outlines  of  your  Defign.  I  am,  with  fincere 
regard,"  etc. 

On  the  26th  January,  1774,  P.M.,  "  a  Petition  of 
a  number  of  Negro  Men,  which  was  entered  on  the 
Journal  of  the  25th  of  June  laft,  and  referred  for  Con- 
iideration  to  this  Seflion,"  was  "  read  again,  together 
with  a  Memorial  of  the  fame  Petitioners  and  Ordered, 
that  Mr.  Speaker,  Mr.  Pickering,  Mr.  Hancock,  Mr. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  137 

Adams,  Mr.  Phillips,  Mr.  Paine,  and  Mr.  Greenleaf 
confider  the  fame  and  report."  Journal,  104. 

All  this  preliminary  preparation  refulted  at  length 
in  cca  Bill  to  prevent  the  Importation  of  Negroes 
and  others  as  Slaves  into  this  Province,"  which  was 
read  the  firft  time  on  the  id  March,  1774,  and  ordered 
to  be  read  again  the  next  day.  Ibid.,  221.  On  the 
3d,  it  was  read  the  fecond  time  in  the  morning,  and 
in  the  afternoon  the  third  time,  and  pafled  to  be  en- 
grofled,  when  it  was  fent  up  to  the  Council  Board 
for  concurrence,  by  Col.  Gerrim,  Col.  Thayer,  Col. 
Bowers,  Mr.  Pickering,  and  Col.  Bacon.  Ibid.,  224. 
On  the  4th  March,'  the  bill  was  returned  as  "  pafled 
in  Council  with  Amendments."  Ibid.,  226.  On  the 
5th,  the  Houfe  voted  to  concur  with  the  Council, 
ibid.,  228 ;  and  on  the  7th,  pafled  the  bill  to  be  enacted. 
ibid.,  237.  On  the  8th,  it  received  th.ej5.nal  fanction 
of  the  Council,  and  only  required  the  approval  of  the 
Governor  to  become  a  law.  That  approval,  however, 
it  failed  to  obtain  ;  the  only  reafon  given  in  the  record 
being  cc  the  Secretary  faid  [on  returning  the  approved 
bills]  that  his  Excellency  had  not  had  time  to  confider 
the  other  Bills  that  had  been  laid  before  him."1  Ibid., 
243.  Compare  alfo  for  Council  proceedings,  General 
Court  Records,  xxx.,  248,  264. 

To  this  hiftory,  derived  from  the  records,  we  are 
fortunately  able  to  add  a  copy  of  the  Bill  itfelf,  which 
is  preferved  in  the  Mafs.  Archives,  Dome/lie  Relations, 
1643-1774,  Vol.  9,  457. 

1  The  General  Court  was  prorogued  March  9th,  and  diflblved  March 
3oth,  1774.     General  Court  Records,  xxx.,  280-81. 


138  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 


ANNO  REGNI  REGIS  GEORGII  TERTII  &c  DECIMO  QUARTO 

AN  ACT  to  prevent  the  importation  of  Negroes  or  other  Perfons  as 
Slaves  into  this  Province ;  and  the  purchaiing  them  within  the 
fame;  and  for  making  provifion  for  relief  of  the  children  of  fuck 
as  are  already  fubjefted  to  Jlavery  Negroes  Mulattoes  &  Indians 
born  within  this  Province. 

WHEREAS  the  Importation  of  Perfons  as  Slaves  into  this  Province 
has  been  found  detrimental  to  the  intereft  of  his  Majefty's  fubjedls 
therein;  And  it  being  apprehended  that  the  abolition  thereof  will  be 
beneficial  to  the  Province — 

Be  it  therefore  Enacted  by  the  Governor  Council  and  Houfe  of 
Reprefentatives  that  whofoever  mail  after  the  Tenth  Day  of  April  next 
import  or  bring  into  this  Province  by  Land  or  Water  any  Negro  or 
other  Perfon  or  Perfons  whether  Male  or  Female  as  a  Slave  or  Slaves 
fhall  for  each  and  every  fuch  Perfon  fo  imported  or  brought  into  this 
Province  forfeit  and  pay  the  fum>  of  one  hundred  Pounds  to  be  recov 
ered  by  prefentment  or  indiclment  of  a  Grand  Jury  and  when  fo 
recovered  to  be  to  his  Majefty  for  the  ufe  of  this  Government :  or  by 
action  of  debt  in  any  of  his  Majefty's  Courts  of  Record  and  in  cafe  of 
fuch  recovery  the  one  moiety  thereof  to  be  to  his  majefty  for  the  ufe 
of  this  Government  the  other  moiety  to  the  Perfon  or  Perfons  who 
fhall  fue  for  the  fame. 

And  be  it  further  Enacted  that  from  and  after  the  Tenth  Day  of 
April  next  any  Perfon  or  Perfons  that  mall  purchafe  any  Negro  or 
other  Perfon  or  Perfons  as  a  Slave  or  Slaves  imported  or  brought  into 
this  Province  as  aforefaid  fhall  forfeit  and  pay  for  every  Negro  or  other 
Perfon  fo  purchafed  Fifty  Pounds  to  be  recovered  and  difpofed  of  in  the 
fame  way  and  manner  as  before  diredled. 

And  be  it  further  Enacted  that  every  Perfon,  concerned  in  im 
porting  or  bringing  into  this  Province,  or  purchafmg  any  fuch  Negro 
or  other  Perfon  or  Perfons  as  aforefaid  within  the  fame  ;  who  fhall  be 
unable,  or  refufe,  to  pay  the  Penalties  or  forfeitures  ordered  by  this 
A61 ;  fhall  for  every  fuch  offence  fuffer  Twelve  months  imprifonment 
without  Bail  or  mainprife, 

Provided  allways  that  nothing  in  this  aft  contained  fhall  extend  to 
fubjedl  to  the  Penalties  aforefaid  the  Maftej-s,  Mariners,  Owners  or 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  139 

Freighters  of  any  fuch  Veflel  or  Veflels,  as  before  the  faid  Tenth  Day 
of  April  next  ihall  have  failed  from  any  Port  or  Ports  in  this  Province, 
for  any  Port  or  Ports  not  within  this  Government,  for  importing  or 
bringing  into  this  Province  any  Negro  or  other  Perfon  or  Perfons  as 
Slaves  who  in  the  profecution  of  the  fame  voyage  may  be  imported  or 
brought  into  the  fame.  Provided  he  mail  not  offer  them  or  any  of 
them  for  fale. 

Provided  alfo  that  this  a6l  (hall  not  be  conftrued  to  extend  to  any 
fuch  Perfon  or  Perfons,  occafionally  hereafter  coming  to  refide  within 
this  Province,  or  paffing  thro'  the  fame,  who  may  bring  fuch  Negro  or 
other  Perfon  or  Perfons  as  neceflary  fervants  into  this  Province  pro 
vided  that  the  ftay  or  refidence  of  fuch  Perfon  or  Perfons  mail  not 
exceed  Twelve  months  or  that  fuch  Perfon  or  Perfons  within  faid  time 
fend  fuch  Negro  or  other  Perfon  or  Perfons  out  of  this  Province  there 
to  be  and  remain,  and  alfo  that  during  faid  Refidence  fuch  Negro  or 
other  Perfon  or  Perfons  mall  not  be  fold  or  alienated  within  the  fame. 
V  And  be  it  further  Enabled  and  declared  that  nothing  in  this  ad 
contained Jhall  extend  or  be  conftrued  to  extend  for  retaining  or  hold 
ing  in  perpetual  fervitude  any  Negro  or  other  Perfon  or  Perfons 
now  in/laved  within  this  Province  but  that  every  fuch  Negro  or 
other  Perfon  or  Perfons  Jhall  be  intituled  to  all  the  Benefits  fuch 
Negro  or  other  Perfon  or  Perfons  might  by  Law  have  been  intituled 
to,  in  cafe  this  ad  had  not  been  made. 

In  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  March  2,  1774.  Read  a  firft  & 
fecond  Time.  March  3,  1774.  Read  a  third  Time  &  pafled  to  be 
engrofTed.  Sent  up  for  Concurrence. 

T.  GUSHING,  Spkr. 

In  Council  March  3,  1774.  Read  a  firft  Time.  4.  Read  a  fecond 
Time  and  pafled  a  Concurrence  to  be  EngrofTed  with  the  Amend 
ment  at  y  dele  the  whole  Claufe.  Sent  down  for  Concurrence. 

THOS.  FLUCKER,  Secry. 

In  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  March  4,  1774.  Read  and  con 
curred. 

T.  GUSHING,  Spkr. 

That  portion  of  the  title  to  the  bill  which  we  have 


140  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

italicized  is  ftricken  out  in  the  original.  We  have 
alfo  retained  and  italicized  the  claufe  which  was 
flricken  out  by  the  amendment  of  the  Council.  They 
form  a  part  of  the  hiftory  of  the  bill,  though  not  of 
the  bill  itfelf  as  "  paffed  to  be  enafted." 

Such  was  the  r.efponfe  of  the  Great  and  General 
Court  of  MafTachufetts  to  the  petition  of  her  negro- 
flaves  in  1773-4.  They  prayed  that  they  might  be 
cc  liberated  from  a  State  of  Bondage,  and  made  Free 
men  of  the  Community  ;  and  that  this  Court  would 
give  and  grant  to  them  fome  part  of  the  unimproved 
Lands  belonging  to  the  Province  for  a  Settlement,  or 
relieve  them  in  fuch  other  Way  as  mall  feem  good  arid 
wife  upon  the  Whole."  Not  one  of  their  prayers  was 
anfwered.  It  would  feem  that  an  attempt  was  made 
to  include  in  the  bill,  an  indirect  legiflative  approval 
of  fome  of  the  doctrines  maintained  by  Counfel  for 
the  negroes  in  the  "  freedom  fuits ;"  but  even  this 
failed ;  and  a  prohibitory  act  againft  the  importation 
of  flaves  was  offered  to  the  Governor  for  his  ap 
proval,  which  it  was  known  beforehand  could  not  be 
obtained. 

Whether  Hutchinfon  had  actually  received  an  in- 
ftruction  from  the  Crown  on  the  fubject  at  this  time 
or  not,  there  is  no  room  for  doubt  as  to  the  general 
policy  of  Great  Britain.  She  had  aided  her  colonial 
offspring  to  become  flaveholders  ;  me  had  encouraged 
her  merchants  in  tempting  them  to  acquire  flaves  ; 
me  herfelf  excelled  all  her  competitors  in  flave- 
ftealing ;  and  from  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne,  the 
flave-trade  was  among  her  moft  envied  and  cherimed 
monopolies,  its  protection  and  increafe  being  a  princi- 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  141 

pal  feature  in  her  commercial  policy.  The  great 
"  distinction  "  of  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht,  as  the  Queen 
expreffly  called  it,  was  that  the  Afliento  or  Contract 
for  furniming  the  Spanim  Weft  Indies  with  Negroes, 
mould  be  made  with  England,  for  the  term  of  thirty 
years,  in  the  fame  manner_as  it  had  been  enjoyed  by 
the  French  for  ten  years  before.  Queen's  Speech, 
6  June,  1712. 

This  was  what  her  great  ftatesmen  and  divines  of 
the  Church  of  England  were  fo  eager  and  proud  to 
fecure  for  their  country  !  For  all  her  facrifices  in  the 
war,  the  millions  of  treafure  she  had  fpent,  the  blood 
of  her  children  fo  prodigally  fhed,  with  the  glories  of 
Blenheim,  of  Ramillies,  of  Oudenarde,  and  Malpla- 
quet,  England  found  her  confolation  and  reward  in 
seizing  and  enjoying,  as  the  lion's  fhare1  of  refults  of 
the  Grand  Alliance  againft  the  Bourbons,  the  exclu- 
five  right  for  thirty  years  of  felling  African  flaves  to 
the  Spanim  Weft  Indies  and  the  Coaft  of  America  ! 
Compare  Macknighfs  Bolingbroke,  346-8.  Who  will 
wonder  that  men  who  had  thus  been  taught  to  believe 
cc  that  the  Negro-Trade  on  the  Coaft  of  Africa  was 
the  chief  and  fundamental  fupport  of  the  Britim 
Colonies  and  Plantations  "  in  America,  mould  frown 
upon  legiflation  in  the  colonies  fo  utterly  inconfiftent 
with  the  interefts  of  Britim  Commerce,  or  that  the 

1  By  the  articles  of  the  Grand  Alliance,  England  and  all  the  other  states 
fubfcribing  them  were  pledged  neither  to  enter  into  any  feparate  treaty 
with  the  enemy,  nor  feek  to  negotiate  for  themfelves  any  exceptional  privi 
lege  to  the  exclufion  of  the  other  members  of  the  Confederacy.  Of  courfe 
this  obligation  was  totally  difregarded  by  England,  who  infisted  on  the 
conceflion  of  the  Afliento  Contrail  by  France  and  Spain  before  the  pro- 
pofals  for  peace  were  even  communicated  to  the  rest  of  the  Allies  ! 


142  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

modeft  efforts  of  Maffachufetts  in  1774,  fhould  be 
met  by  Hutchinfon  and  Gage  with  the  fame  fpirit 
which,  in  1775,  dictated  the  reply  of  the  Earl  of 
Dartmouth  to  the  earner!  remonftrance  of  the  Agent 
of  Jamaica  againft  the  policy  of  the  government : 
cc  We  cannot  allow  the  colonies  to  check  or  dis 
courage,  in  any  manner,  a  traffic  fo  beneficial  to  the 
nation."  Bridges'  Jamaica,  n.,  475.  Notes. 

We  cannot  be  accufed  of  belittling  the  refiftance 
thus  prefented  to  any  colonial  interference  with  the 
flave-trade,  when  we  exprefs  our  regret  that  the  legis 
lative  annals  of  Maflachufetts  record  no  attempt  to 
repeal  the  local  laws  by  which  flavery  had  been 
eftablifhed,  regulated,  and  maintained.  Such  a  mea- 
fure,  which  mould  alfo  have  granted  the  relief  prayed 
for  by  the  negroes  in  their  petition,  and  embodied  the 
wife  fuggeflions  of  the  town  of  Leicefter  (ante,  p.  133), 
might  well  have  encountered  lefs  ferious  oppofition 
from  the  fervants  of  the  Crown  than  this  twice-re 
jected  non-importation  act  of  1774. l 

In  the  brief  feflion  of  the  General  Court  at  Salem, 
in  June,  1774,  after  Hutchinfon's  fucceflbr,  Gage,  the 
laft  Royal  Governor,  had  commenced  his  adminiftra- 
tion,  the  fame  bill  fubftantially,  for  the  variations  are 
unimportant,  was  hurried  through  the  forms  of  legis 
lation.  It  was  introduced,  read  a  firft,  fecond,  and 
third  time,  and  pafled  to  be  engrofTed  on  the  fame  day, 

1  The  rhetorical  flourifties  with  which  Lord  Mansfield  ornamented  his 
decifion  in  the  famous  cafe  of  Somerfet  would  have  furnimed  an  excellent 
preamble  to  fuch  an  aft.  The  cafe  was  well  known  in  Maflachufetts, 
having  been  reprinted  more  than  once.  But  the  General  Court  of  Mafla 
chufetts  had  no  more  intention  than  Lord  Mansfield  had  power  to  abolifh 
flavery  at  that  period. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  143 

loth  June.  Journal^  27.  On  the  i6th,  the  engroffed 
bill  was  read  and  pafTed  to  be  enaded.  Ibid.,  41.  In 
the  Council,  on  the  fame  day,  it  was  read  a  third  time 
and  pafled  a  concurrence  to  be  enacted.  Gen.  Court 
Records,  xxx.,  322.  On  the  following  day,  June  iyth, 
the  General  Court  was  diffolved.  Like  that  of  which 
it  was  a  copy,  the  bill  appears  cc  not  to  have  been  con- 
fented  to  by  the  Governor." 

The  fad  is  not  to  be  difguifed  that  thefe  efforts 
were  political  movements  againft  the  government  as 
much  as  anything  elfe.  Sympathy  for  the  flave,  and 
moral  fcruples  againft  flavery,  became  lefs  urgent  and 
troublefome  after  the  royal  negative  had  become 
powerlefs  againft  the  legiflation  of  the  people  of 
Maffachufetts.  The  fad  that  mofl  of  the  States  were 
flow  or  relaxed  their  efforts,  after  the  power  came  into 
their  hands,  and  they  were  "uncontrolled  by  the 
adion  of  the  Mother  Country,"  would  not  diminifh 
the  credit  due  to  Maffachufetts,  if  me  had  taken  the 
lead  and  maintained  it.  But  that  honor  is  not  hers  ! 
Nor  did  the  feparate  adion  of  any  of  the  States 
effectually  limit,  much  lefs  deftroy,  this  infamous 
traffic. 

The  Continental  Affociation,  adopted  and  figned 
by  all  the  members  of  the  Congrefs  on  the  2oth  of 
Odober,  1774,  for  carrying  into  effect  the  non-impor 
tation,  non-confumption,  and  non-exportation  refolve 
of  the  27th  of  September,  provided  for  the  difcon- 
tinuance  of  the  Slave-Trade.  The  Continental  Con 
grefs,  on  the  6th  of  April,  1776,  formally  cc  Rejol- 
ved,  That  no  flave  be  imported  into  any  of  the 
thirteen  United  Colonies."  .  There  is  reafon  to  be- 


144  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

lieve  that  this  resolution  received  the  unanimous 
aSTent  of  the  Congrefs.  Force  s  Dec.  of  Independence, 
p.  42.  But  no  provifion  was  made  in  the  Articles  of 
Confederation  to  hinder  the  importation  of  Slaves,  and 
this  pernicious  commerce  was  never  abfolutely  crufhed 
until  the  power  of  the  nation  was  exercifed  againSl  it 
under  the  authority  of  the  Conftitution. 

Slavery,  however,  was  not  forgotten  or  neglected 
for  want  of  notice.  In  the  firft  Provincial  Congrefs 
of  MaSTachufetts,  October  25,  1774, 

"  Mr.  Wheeler  brought  into  Congrefs  a  letter  di 
rected  to  Doct.  Appleton,  purporting  the  propriety, 
that  while  we  are  attempting  to  free  ourfelves  from 
our  prefent  embarraSTments,  and  preferve  ourfelves 
from  Slavery,  that  we  alfo  take  into  consideration  the 
Slate  and  circumSlances  of  the  negro  Slaves  in  this  pro 
vince.  The  fame  was  read,  and  it  was  moved  that  a 
Committee  be  appointed  to  take  the  fame  into  con 
sideration.  After  fome  debate  thereon,  the  queftion 
was  put,  whether  the  matter  now  fubSlde,  and  it 
paSTed  in  the  affirmative."  Journals,  29. 

In  May,  1775,  the  Committee  of  Safety  (Han 
cock  and  Warren's  Committee)  came  to  a  formal 
refolution,  which  is  certainly  one  of  the  moSl  Signifi 
cant  documents  of  the  period. 

"  Refolded,  That  it  is  the  opinion  of  this  Com 
mittee,  as  the  conteSl  now  between  Great  Britain  and 
the  Colonies  refpects  the  liberties  and  privileges  of 
the  latter,  which  the  Colonies  are  determined  to 
maintain,  that  the  admiSTion  of  any  perfons,  as  fol- 
diers,  into  the  army  now  raising,  but  only  fuch  as  are 
freemen,  will  be  inconSlflent  with  the  principles  that 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  145 

are  to  be  fupported,  and  reflect  dishonor  on  this 
Colony,  and  that  no  flaves  be  admitted  into  this  army 
upon  any  confideration  whatever." 

This  refolution  being  communicated  to  the  Pro 
vincial  Congrefs  (June  6,  1775),  was  read,  and  ordered 
to  lie  on  the  table  for  further  confideration.  It  was 
probably  allowed  to  cc  fubfide,"  like  the  former  pro- 
pofition.  The  prohibition  againft  the  admiffion  of 
flaves  into  the  Maflachufetts  Army  clearly  recognizes 
flavery  as  an  exifting  inftitution. 

The  negroes  of  Briflol  and  Worcefter  having 
petitioned  the  Committee  of  Correfpondence  of  the 
latter  county  to  aflift  them  in  obtaining  their  free 
dom,  it  was  refolved,  in  a  Convention  held  at  Wor 
cefter,  June  14,  1775,  "  That  we  abhor  the  enflaving 
of  any  of  the  human  race,  and  particularly  of  the 
negroes  in  this  country,  and  that  whenever  there 
mall  be  a  door  opened,  or  opportunity  prefent  for 
anything  to  be  done  towards  the  emancipation  of  the 
negroes,  we  will  ufe  our  influence  and  endeavor  that 
fuch  a  thing  may  be  brought  about."  Lincoln  s  Hift. 
of  Wore efter,  no. 

The  high  tory  writers  of  1775  were  not  flow  to 
avail  themfelves  of  the  argument  of  inconfiftency 
againft  the  whigs  of  the  day.  One  writer  faid: 

"  Negroe  flaves  in  Bofton  !  It  cannot  be  !  It  is 
neverthelefs  very  true.  For  though  the  Boftonians  have 
grounded  their  rebellions  on  the  c  immutable  laws  of 
nature/  and  have  refolved  in  their  Town  Meetings,  that 
*  It  is  the  firft  principle  in  civil  fociety,  founded  in 
nature  and  reafon,  that  no  law  of  fociety  can  be  binding 
on  any  individual,  without  his  confent  given  by  himfelf 
10 


146  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

in  perfon,  or  by  his  reprefentative  of  his  own  free 
election  ;  yet,  notwithftanding  the  immutable  laws 
of  nature,  and  this  public  refolution  of  their  own  in 
Town  Meetings,  they  actually  have  in  town  two 
thoufand  Negroe  flaves,  who  neither  by  themfelves  in 
perfon,  nor  by  reprefentatives  of  their  own  free  elec 
tion  ever  gave  confent  to  their  prefent  ftate  of  bond 
age."  Meins  Sagittarius' s  Letters,  pp.  38,  39. 

On  June  5th,  1774,  two  difcourfes  on  liberty  were 
delivered  at  the  North  Church  in  Newburyport,  by 
Nathaniel  Niles,  M.  A., — which  were  printed  in  a 
pamphlet  of  fixty  pages.  A  brief  paflage  near  the 
clofe  of  the  firft  difcourfe  prefents  a  ftrong  argument 
againft  the  inftitution.  pp.  37,  38. 

In  1774,  Deacon  Benjamin  Colman,  of  Byfield 
Church,  Newbury,  Maflachufetts,  made  himfelf  con 
spicuous  in  his  neighborhood  by  his  exertions  againft 
flavery.  In  the  Eflex  Journal,  of  Newburyport, 
July  20,  1774,  an  eflay  of  his  was  published,  in  which 
he  fays : 

1  cc  And  this  iniquity  is  eftabliftied  by  law  in  this 
province,  and  although  there  have  been  fome  feeble 
attempts  made  to  break  the  yoke  and  fet  them  at 
liberty,  yet  the  thing  is  not  effected,  but  they  are  ftill 
kept  under  the  civil  yoke  of  bondage.'  Coffin  s  New 
bury,  340. 

In  the  following  year,  Sept.  16,  1775,  the  fame 
zealous  deacon  addreffed  a  letter  to  a  member  of  the 
General  Court,  "  by  whom  (he  thought)  this  idolatry 
mould  be  thrown  down,  and  a  reformation  take  place 
by  the  authority  of  that  legiflative  power."  His 
appeals  to  the  love  of  freedom,  which  was  then  the 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  147 

cry  of  the  whole  land,  are  moft  forcible,  and  his  ftrong 
fears  of  the  further  judgments  of  God  as  a  confe- 
quence  of  this  cc  capital  fin  of  thefe  States,"  flavery, 
are  full  of  warning.  He  concludes  with  the  follow 
ing  paragraph,  which  is  not  lefs  interefling  in  this 
connection  from  the  fpecial  reference  to  Bofton — in 
his  pious  improvement  of  an  important  fad  already 
fet  forth  in  thefe  Notes  : 

<c  But,  Sir,  you  may  be  ready  too  haftily  to  con 
clude  from  this  writing  that  my  mind  is  fo  fattened 
upon  the  flave-trade,  as  if  it  were  the  only  crime  that 
we  were  chargeable  with,  or  that  God  was  chaftening 
us  for.  As  I  have  faid  before,  fo  fay  I  again,  our 
tranfgreffions  are  multiplied,  but  yet  this  crime  is 
more  particularly  pointed  at  than  any  other.  WAS 

BOSTON    THE    FIRST    PORT    ON    THIS    CONTINENT  THAT 

BEGAN  THE  SLAVE-TRADE,  and  are  they  not  the  firft  Jhut 
up  by  an  oppreffive  atty  and  brought  almoft  to  defolation, 
wherefore,  Siry  though  we  may  not  be  peremptory  in  apply 
ing  the  judgments  of  God,  yet  I  cannot  pajs  over  fuch 
providences  without  a  remark.  But  to  conclude.  I 
entreat  and  befeech  you  by  all  the  love  you  have  for 
this  town,  by  all  the  regard  you  have  for  this  diftrefled, 
bleeding  province,  as  for  the  American  Colonies  in 
general,  that  you  exert  yourfelf,  and  improve  your 
utmoft  endeavors  at  the  Court  to  obtain  a  difcharge 
for  the  flaves  from  their  bondage.  If  this  was  done, 
I  mould  expect  fpeedy  deliverance  to  arife  to  us,  but 
if  this  opprejjion  is  flill  continued  and  maintained  by 
authority,  I  can  only  fay,  my  foul  mall  weep  in  fecret 
places  for  that  crime."  Ibid.y  342. 


148  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 


VII. 

IN  the  autumn  of  1776,  fympathy  for  the  flave  in 
Maflachufetts  received  a  frefh  impulfe.  Two  negro 
men,  captured  on  the  high  feas,  were  advertifed  for 
fale  at  auction,  as  a  part  of  the  cargo  and  appurte 
nances  of  a  prize  duly  condemned  in  the  Maritime 
Court.1  This  advertifement  roufed  the  fpirit  of 
hoftility  to  flavery  to  a  remarkable  degree,  and  the 
Legiflature  were  excited  to  begin  the  work  of  reform 
apparently  with  great  earneftnefs  and  vigor. 

On  Friday,  Sept.  13,  1776,  at  the  afternoon 
feffion,  the  Maflachufetts  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives 

"  Refohed,  That  Wednefday  next,  at  three  o'clock 
in  the  afternoon,  be  afligned  for  choofing  a  committee 
to  be  joined  with  a  Committee  of  the  Honorable 
Board,  to  take  under  confideration  the  condition  of 
the  African  Slaves,  now  in  this  State,  or  that  hereafter 
may  be  brought  into  it,  and  to  report."  Jour.  H.  of 

R.y       105. 

We  find  no  record  of  proceedings  in  accordance 
with  this  refolution  until  a  little  more  than  a  month 
later,  when,  on  the  i9th  of  October,  1776,  it  was 
"Ordered,  that  Mr.  Sergeant,  Mr.  Murrey,  Mr. 
Appleton,  and  Capt.  Stone,  with  fuch  as  the  honorable 

1  This  was  the  Hannibal,  a  floop  of  fixty  tons,  commanded  by  William 
Fitzpatrick,  and  taken  while  on  a  voyage  from  Jamaica  to  Turk's  Island- 
Am.  Archives,  v.,  in.,  258.  An  advertifement  in  the  Nenv  England 
Chronicle,  Auguft  15,  1776,  announces  the  Maritime  Court  for  ye  Middle 
Diftrift  to  be  held  at  Bofton,  5th  September,  1776,  to  try  the  Juftice  of  the 
Capture  of  the  Sloop  called  the  Hannibal,  etc.,  and  her  Cargo  and  Appur 
tenances. 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  149 

Houfe  may  join  be  a  Committee  to  take  under  con- 
fideration  the  condition  of  the  African  flaves  now  in 
this  State  [or  that  may  be  hereafter  brought  into  this 
State]  or  may  be  hereafter  brought  into  it  and  report." 
Journal  H.  of  R.,  p.  127.  This  refolution  was  con 
curred  in  by  the  Council,  and  William  Sever,  Benja 
min  Greenleaf,  and  Daniel  Hopkins,  Efqrs.,  were 
joined  on  the  part  of  the  Board.  Gen.  Court  Records, 
Vol.  xxxiii.,  p.  55.  We  have  made  diligent  fearchfor 
further  action  under  this  refolution  and  appointment 
of  the  Committee,  but  have  failed  to  difcover  any 
trace  of  it.  The  matter  was  probably  "allowed  to 
fubiide  "  again. 

On  the  fame  day,  however,  in  which  the  Houfe 
firft  determined  to  give  attention  to  the  condition  of 
the  African  {laves,  on  the  ijth  of  September,  1776, 
their  refolution  to  that  effect  was  immediately  followed 
by  another  "  to  prevent  the  fale  of  two  negro  men 
lately  brought  into  this  State,  as  prifoners  taken  on 
the  high  feas,  and  advertifed  to  be  fold  at  Salem,  the 
1 7th  inft.,  by  public  auction."  Journal^  p.  105.  The 
refolve  does  not  appear  on  the  Journal,  but  from  the 
files  preserved  among  the  Archives  of  the  State,  we 
are  enabled  to  prefent  it  as  thus  originally  patted, 
viz. : 

"!N  THE  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  SEPT.  13,  1776: 

"  WHEREAS  this  Houfe  is  credibly  informed  that  two  negro  men  lately- 
brought  into  this  State  as  prifoners  taken  on  the  High  Seas  are  adver 
tifed  to  be  fold  at  Salem,  the  1 7th  inftant,  by  public  auftion, 

"  Rtfolved,  That  the  felling  and  enflaving  the  human  fpecies  is  a 


150  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

direft  violation  of  the  natural  rights  alike  vefted  in  all  men  by  their 
Creator,  and  utterly  inconiiftent  with  the  avowed  principles  on  which 
this  and  the  other  United  States  have  carried  their  ftruggle  for  liberty 
even  to  the  laft  appeal,  and  therefore,  that  all  perfons  connected  with 
the  faid  negroes  be  and  they  hereby  are  forbidden  to  fell  them  or  in 
any  manner  to  treat  them  otherways  than  is  already  ordered  for  the 
treatment  of  prifoners  of  war  taken  in  the  fame  veflell  or  others  in  the 
like  employ  and  if  any  fale  of  the  faid  negroes  mail  be  made,  it  is  here 
by  declared  null  and  void. 

"  Sent  up  for  concurrence, 

"  SAMI*.  FREEMAN,  Speaker,  P.  T. 

"In  Council,  Sept.  14,  1776.  Read  and  concurred  as  taken  into  a 
new  draught.  Sent  down  for  concurrence. 

JOHN  AVERY,  Dpy.  Secy. 

"In  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  Sept.  14,  1776.  Read  and  non- 
concurred,  and  the  Houfe  adhere  to  their  own  vote.  Sent  up  for 
concurrence. 

J.  WARREN,  Speaker. 

"In  Council,  Sept.  16,  1776.  Read  and  concurred  as  now  taken  into  as 
new  draft.  Sent  down  for  concurrence. 

JOHN  AVERY,  Dpy.  Secy. 

"In  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  Sept.  16,  1779.  Read  and  con 
curred. 

J.  WARREN,  Speaker. 
ff  Confented  to. 

JER.  POWELL,  JABEZ  FISHER, 

W.  SEVER,  B.  WHITE, 

B.  GREENLEAF,  MOSES  GILL, 

CALEB  GUSHING,  DAN'L.  HOPKINS, 

B.  CHADBOURN,  BENJ.  AUSTIN, 

JOHN  WHETCOMB,  WM.  PHILLIPS, 

ELDAD  TAYLOR,  D.  SEWALL, 

S.  HOLTEN,  DAN'L  HOPKINS." 

We  give  a  more  particular  account  of  the  legifla- 
tive  hiftory  and  progrefs  of  this  refolve,  derived  from 
the  journals. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  151 

The  fubjed:  reappears  on  the  Journal  of  the  Houfe 
of  the  I4th  September,  as  follows  : 

"  David  Sewall,  Efq.,  brought  down  the  refolve 
which  patted  the  Houfe  yefterday,  forbidding  the  fale 
of  two  negroes,  with  the  following  vote  of  Council 
thereon,  viz.  :  In  Council,  Sept.  14,  1776.  Read  and 
concurred,  as  taken  into  a  new  draught.  Sent  down 
for  concurrence.  Read  and  non-concurred,  and  the 
Houfe  adhere  to  their  own  vote.  Sent  up  for  con 
currence."  Ibid.,  1 06. 

The  members  of  the  Council  prefent  on  the  I4th 
September,  1776,  were 

JAMES  BOWDOIN,  MOSES  GILL, 

BENJAMIN  GREENLEAF,  BENJAMIN  AUSTIN, 

RICHARD  DERBY,  SAMUEL  HOLTEN, 

JER.  POWELL,  BENJAMIN  WHITE, 

CALEB  CUSHING,  HENRY  GARDNER, 

BENJAMIN  CHADBURN,  JABEZ  FISHER, 

WILLIAM  SEAVER,  WILLIAM  PHILLIPS, 

JOHN  WINTHROP,  DAVID  SEWALL, 

THOMAS  CUSHING,  JOSEPH  CUSHING, 

ELDAD  TAYLOR,  DANIEL  HOPKINS. 
General  Court  Records,  etc.,  p.  581. 

The  Council  Minutes,  as  contained  in  the  General 
Court  Records,  March  13,  1776 — Sept.  18,  1776,^. 
581—2,  under  the  date  of  September  I4th,  1776,  give 
the  refolve  as  finally  patted,  with  the  addition,  cc  In 
Council.  Read  and  concurred.  Confented  to  by  the 
major  part  of  the  Council."  This,  however,  is  an 
error,  as  appears  not  only  from  the  entry  on  the 


152  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Journal  of  the  Houfe  and  the  original  document  from 
the  files  as  given  above,  but  alfo  from  the  following 
minute  of  the  Council  in  the  fame  volume  of  Records. 
Under  date  of  i6th  September — the  following  mem 
bers  of  Council  being  prefent, 

JER.  POWELL,  BENJAMIN  GREENLEAF, 

JOHN  WINTHROP,  ELDAD  TAYLOR, 

JNO.  WHETCOMB,  WILLIAM  PHILLIPS, 

WILLIAM  SEAVER,  CALEB  CUSHING, 

BENJAMIN  CHADBURN,  SAMUEL  HOLTEN, 

JABEZ  FISHER,  DAVID  SEWALL, — 

Rev.  Mr.  [John]  Murray  came  up  with  a  Meflage 
from  the  Houfe  to  acquaint  the  Board  that  it  was 
their  defire  to  know  whether  the  refolve  refpecting 
the  fale  of  Negroes  at  Salem  had  parTed. 

David  Sewall,  Efq.,  went  down  with  a  mefTage  to 
acquaint  the  Hon.  Houfe  that  it  was  under  confidera- 
tion  of  the  Board.  Ibid.,  pp.  585,  589. 

On  the  fame  day,  i6th  September,  1776,  the  final 
difpofition  of  the  matter  in  the  Houfe  is  thus  recorded 
in  their  journal. 

"  John  Whitcomb,  Efq.,  brought  down  the  refolve 
forbidding  the  fale  of  two  negroes,  with  the  following 
vote  of  Council  thereon,  viz.  :  In  Council,  Sept.  16, 
1776.  Read  and  concurred,  as  now  taken  into  a  new 
draught.  Sent  down  for  concurrence.  Read  and 
concurred."  Ibid.y  109.  The  refolve,  as  finally 
pafled  by  the  General  Court,  appears  in  the  printed 
volume  of  refolves  for  that  period. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  153 


"LXXXIII.  Refolve  forbidding  the  fale  of  two  Negroes  brought  in  as 
Prifoners;  Pafled  September  14,  [i6th,]  1776. 

"  Whereas  this  Court  is  credibly  informed  that  two  Negro  Men 
lately  taken  on  the  High  Seas,  on  board  the  floop  Hannibal,  and 
brought  into  this  State  as  Prifoners,  are  advertized  to  be  fold  at  Salem, 
the  1 7th  inftant,  by  public  Auction  : 

"  Refolved,  That  all  Perfons  concerned  with  the  faid  Negroes  be, 
and  they  are  hereby  forbidden  to  fell  them,  or  in  any  manner  to  treat 
them  otherwife  than  is  already  ordered  for  the  Treatment  of  Prifoners 
taken  in  like  manner ;  and  if  any  Sale  of  the  faid  Negroes  mall  be 
made  it  is  hereby  declared  null  and  void ;  and  that  whenever  it  mall 
appear  that  any  Negroes  are  taken  on  the  High  Seas  and  brought  as 
Prifoners  into  this  State,  they  mall  not  be  allowed  to  be  Sold,  nor 
treated  any  otherwife  than  as  Prifoners  are  ordered  to  be  treated  who 
are  taken  in  like  Manner."  Rejblves^  p.  14. 

The  high-toned,  bold,  and  unequivocal  declaration 
of  anti-flavery  principles,  with  which  it  originally  fet 
out,  is  gone ;  but  it  is  flill  the  mofl  honorable  docu 
ment  of  MafTachufetts  legiflation  concerning  the 
negro.  To  appreciate  its  importance  and  properly  to 
underftand  this  fubjecl:  of  negro  captures  and  recap 
tures,  it  is  neceflary  to  extend  our  inquiry  beyond  the 
limits  of  the  legiflation  of  a  fingle  Colony  ;  and  we 
mall  therefore  make  no  apology  for  prefenting  to  the 
reader  in  this  place  the  refults  of  our  examination  of 
the  national  legiflation  and  action  with  reference 
thereto, 

Its  practical  importance  was  obvious,  and  the 
neceflity  of  an  uniform  rule  was  too  apparent  to 
admit  of  a  doubt.  Accordingly  the  Continental  Con- 
grefs,  on  the  I4th  of  October,  1776 — jufl  one  month 
after  the  proceedings  in  the  Legiflature  of  MafTachu- 


1 54  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

fetts  concerning  the  two  negroes  captured  in  the 
Hannibal — appointed  a  fpecial  Committee  of  three 
members  (Mr.  Rich.  Henry  Lee,  Mr.  Wilfon,  and 
Mr.  Hall)  <c  to  conSider  what  is  to  be  done  with  Ne 
groes  taken  by  veffels  of  war,  in  the  fervice  of  the 
United  States."  We  have  found  no  report  of  this 
Committee,  nor  are  we  able  to  fay  what  action,  if  any, 
was  taken  until  a  later  period  of  the  war. 

The  Continental  Congrefs,  by  refolutions  of  25th 
November,  1775,  had  recommended  it  to  the  feveral 
Legislatures  to  erect  Courts,  or  give  jurifdiction  to  the 
Courts  in  being,  for  the  purpofe  of  determining  con 
cerning  captures.  Still,  from  the  beginning,  Congrefs 
exercifed  the  power  of  controlling,  by  appeal,  the 
feveral  admiralty  jurifdidions  of  the  States.  Journal, 
6th  March,  lid  May,  1779,  lift  March,  ^th  May, 
1780.  Journal  H.  of  R.  Pa.,  Jan.  31,  1780. 

Congrefs  had  prefcribed  a  rule  of  the  distribution 
of  prizes,  and  an  early  act  of  MaSTachufetts  is  curiouSly 
illustrative  of  the  doctrine  of  a  divided  fovereignty. 
By  Chapter  XVI.  of  the  laws  of  1776,  it  was  provi 
ded  that  diftribution  Should  take  place  according  to 
the  Laws  of  this  Colony,  when  prizes  were  taken  by 
the  Forces  or  the  Inhabitants  thereof;  and  when  they 
Shall  be  taken  by  the  fleet  and  army  of  the  United 
Colonies,  then  to  distribute  and  difpofe  of  them  ac 
cording  to  the  Refolves  and  Orders  of  the  Congrefs. 
Compare  Chapter  x.,  1776,  and  Chapter  i.,  1775,  p.  9. 

MaSTachufetts  ratified  the  Articles  of  Confedera 
tion  in  1778,  and  the  confederation  was  completed 
March  iSt,  1781.  The  ninth  article  gave  to  the 
United  States  in  Congrefs  aSTembled  the  fole  and  ex- 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  155 

clufive  right  of  eftablifhing  rules  for  deciding,  in  all 
cafes,  what  captures  on  land  or  water  fhall  be  legal, 
and  in  what  manner  prizes  taken  by  land  or  naval 
forces  in  the  fervice  of  the  United  States  fhall  be 
divided  or  appropriated,  as  well  as  eftablifhing  courts 
for  receiving  and  determining  finally  appeals  in  all 
cafes  of  captures. 

Accordingly,  Congrefs  proceeded  to  legiflate  on 
the  fubjed,  and,  during  the  year  1781,  completed  an 
ordinance,  afcertaining  what  captures  on  water  fhall 
be  lawful,  in  purfuance  of  the  powers  delegated  by  the 
confederation  in  fuch  cafes.  On  the  4th  of  June, 
1781,  an  ordinance  was  reported  for  eftablifhing  a 
court  of  appeals,  etc.  On  the  25th  of  the  fame 
month  the  fubject  was  difcuffed,  and,  on  the  I7th  of 
July,  1781,  the  ordinance  having  been  further  de 
bated,  was  recommitted,  and  the  committee  were 
inftructed  to  prepare  and  bring  an  ordinance  for  regu 
lating  the  proceedings  of  the  admiralty  courts  of  the 
feveral  States  in  cafes  of  capture,  to  revife  and  colled: 
into  one  body  the  refolutions  of  Congrefs  and  other 
convenient  rules  of  decifion,  and  to  call  upon  the 
feveral  Legiflatures  to  aid  by  necefTary  provifions  the 
powers  referved  to  Congrefs  by  the  Articles  of  Con 
federation  on  the  fubject  of  captures  from  the  enemy. 
On  the  2ift  of  September,  1781,  Congrefs  refumed 
the  fecond  reading  of  the  ordinance  refpecling  cap 
tures,  and  on  the  queftion  to  agree  to  the  following 
paragraph,  the  yeas  and  nays  were  required  by  Mr. 
Matthews,  of  South  Carolina :  "  On  the  recapture  by 
a  citizen  of  any  negro,  mulatto,  Indian,  or  other 
perfon  from  whom  labor  or  fervice  is  lawfully  claimed 


156  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

by  another  citizen,  fpecific  reftitution  fhall  be  adjudged 
to  the  claimant,  whether  the  original  capture  fhall 
have  been  made  on  land  or  water,  a  reafonable  falvage 
being  paid  by  the  claimant  to  the  recaptor,  not  exceed 
ing  one-fourth  part  of  the  value  of  fuch  labor  or 
fervice,  to  be  eftimated  according  to  the  laws  of  the 
State  of  which  the  claimant  fliall  be  a  citizen  :  but  if  the 
fervice  of  fuch  negro,  mulatto,  Indian  or  other  perfon, 
captured  below  high  water  mark,  mail  not  be  legally 
claimed  by  a  citizen  of  thefe  United  States^  he  mall  be  fet 
at  liberty." 

It  was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  twenty  ayes  to  two 
noes.  Both  noes  were  from  the  South  Carolina 
delegates.  By  the  method  of  voting  in  that  Congrefs, 
the  vote  was  feven  States  in  the  affirmative,  and  one 
in  the  negative — four  States  not  voting.  The  affirma 
tive  States  were  Georgia,  Virginia,  Maryland,  Penn- 
fylvania,  New  York,  Rhode  liland,  and  Maflachufetts. 
States  not  voting,  North  Carolina',  Delaware,  New 
Jerfey,  and  Connecticut,  although  all  their  delegates 
prefent  voted  in  the  affirmative.  On  the  2yth  Sep 
tember,  when  the  ordinance  came  up  for  a  third  read 
ing,  an  attempt  was  made  to  obtain  a  fecond  vote  on 
this  paragraph,  but  it  was  ruled  to  be  out  of  order. 
The  ordinance  was  farther  debated  November  8,  13, 
30,  and  fome  important  changes  were  made,  which 
will  appear  on  comparifon  of  the  pafTages  in  italics. 
It  was  finally  pafled,  apparently  without  oppofition, 
on  the  4th  of  December,  1781,  as  follows: 

"  On  the  recapture  by  a  citizen  of  any  negro, 
mulatto,  Indian,  or  other  perfon,  from  whom  labor 
or  fervice  is  lawfully  claimed  by  a  State  or  a  citizen  of 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  157 

a  State,  fpecific  reftitution  fhall  be  adjudged  to  the 
claimant,  whether  the  original  capture  fhall  have  been 
made  on  land  or  water,  and  without  regard  to  the  time 
of  poffeffion  by  the  enemy,  a  reafonable  falvage  being  paid 
by  the  claimant  to  the  recap  tor,  not  exceeding  i~4th 
of  the  value  of  fuch  labor  or  fervice,  to  be  eftimated 
according  to  the  laws  of  the  State  under  which  the  claim 
/hall  be  made. 

cc  But  if  the  fervice  of  fuch  negro,  mulatto,  Indian, 
or  other  perfon,  captured  below  high  water  mark, 
mall  not  be  legally  claimed  within  a  year  and  a  day 
from  thejentence  of  the  Court,  he  mail  be  fet  at  liberty." 
Thus  the  action  of  the  legiflative  authorities — colonial 
or  ftate  and  continental  or  national — was  virtually  an 
affirmation  of  the  received  law  on  the  fubject,  which 
was  founded  on  the  doctrine  of  poft  liminium  derived 
from  the  civil  law. 

This,  however,  applied  only  to  recaptures.  There 
is  no  fpecial  provifion  for  cafes  of  capture  of  ilaves 
belonging  to  the  enemy — to  whom  probably  the  old 
doctrine  was  held  to  apply,  that  they  were  lawful  prize, 
and  as  fuch  liable  to  fale  for  the  benefit  of  the 
captors.  This  had  been  the  general,  if  not  univerfal, 
rule. 

Sir  Leoline  Jenkins,  in  a  letter  written  in  1674, 
refpecting  negroes  in  a  Dutch  prize-veflel,  fays  that  it 
will  not  be  controverted  that  on  the  ilatute  of  Prize 
"  negroes  are  to  be  reputed  Goods  and  merchandizes 
in  this  mip,  as  they  are,  generally  fpeaking,  a  part  of 
the  commerce  of  thofe  parts."  Wynne  s  Life  of  Sir  L. 
Jenkins,  $.  707,  quoted  by  John  C.  Hurd. 

Negroes,   captured    in  Canada,    during  the   wars 


158  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

between  the  Englifh  and  French,  were  fent  to  the 
Weft  India  I  {lands  for  fale.  Col.  Doc.,  x.,  131.;  bis, 
138,  140.  In  1747,  the  Englifh  having  captured  a 
negro  fervant,  the  French  took  pains  to  reclaim  him, 
but  the  Englifh  refufed  to  furrender  him  on  the 
ground  that  every  negro  is  a  Jlave,  wherever  he  happens 
to  be,  and  in  whatever  Country  he  may  refide.  N.  T. 
Col.  Doc.,  x.,  210.  This  precedent  was  referred  to  in 
a  fimilar  cafe  in  1750,  with  a  fimilar  decifion,  which 
was  acquiefced  in  by  both  Englifh  and  French.  Ib.,  213. 
See  alfo  the  47th  article  of  Capitulation  for  the  Sur 
render  of  Canada  in  1760.  N.  T.  Col.  Doc.,  x.,  1118. 

In  1761,  upon  the  reduction  of  Martinico,  Maj.- 
Gen.  Monckton  ordered  the  negroes  which  were  taken 
to  be  fold,  and  the  money  to  be  divided  amongft 
the  fubalterns  attached  to  his  army.  Ibid.,  vin., 
250. 

During  the  American  War,  the  flaves  of  the  rebel 
colonifts  were  regarded  by  the  Englifh  as  proper 
fubjects  of  prize  and  booty.  The  N.  E.  Chronicle, 
July  4,  1776,  ftates  that  the  "negroes  carried  off 
when  the  [Britifh]  Army  and  Fleet  were  obliged  to 
evacuate  the  Town  and  Harbor  [of  Bofton]  were  fent 
to  Louisburgh,  to  dig  Coal  for  their  Tyrannical 
Mafters.  Thefe  Blacks,  were  commanded  by  a  cer 
tain  Captain  Lindfey."  It  was  eftimated  that  not 
lefs  than  30,000  were  carried  off  from  Virginia.  Hil- 
dreth,  in.,  355.  Andthoufands  were  carried  off  from 
South  Carolina,  Georgia,  and  other  States.  Mr.  Jeffer- 
fon,  in  his  letter  to  Gordon,  refers  to  thofe  who  were 
fent  to  the  Weft  Indies,  and  exchanged  for  rum, 
fugar,  coffee,  and  fruit.  Works,  11.,  427. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  159 

In  1779,   Sir  Henry  Clinton  iflued  the  following 
proclamation : 

"  By  his  Excellency,  Sir  HENRY  CLINTON,  K.  B.,  General,  and  Com 
mander -in- Chief  of  all  His  Majejly's  Forces  within  the  Colonies 
lying  on  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  from  Nova  Scotia  to  Wejl  Florida, 
indufive,  &c.,  &c.,  &c.  : 


PROCLAMATION. 


"  WHEREAS,  The  Enemy  have  adopted  a  practice  of  enrolling 
NEGROES  among  their  troops :  I  do  hereby  give  Notice,  that  all 
NEGROES  taken  in  Arms,  or  upon  any  military  Duty,  (hall  be  pur- 
chafed  for  [the  public  fervice  at]  a  ftated  price;  the  Money  to  be 
paid  to  the  Captors. 

"  But  I  do  moil  ftrictly  forbid  any  Perfon  to  fell  or  claim  Right 
over  any  NEGROE,  the  Property  of  a  Rebel,  who  may  take  refuge  with 
any  part  of  this  Army  :  And  I  do  promife  to  every  NEGROE  who  mall 
defert  the  Rebel  Standard  full  Security  to  follow  within  thefe  Lines  any 
occupation  which  he  fhall  think  proper. 

"  Given  under  my  Hand,  at  Head-Quarters, 
PHILIPSBURGH,  the  3Oth  day  of  June 
1779. 

"H.  CLINTON. 
"  By  his  Excellency's  Command, 

"  JOHN  SMITH,  Secretary." 

When  this  proclamation  was  firft  iflued,  the  words 
enclofed  within  brackets  were  not  in  it.  They  were 
added  in  the  publication  two  months  later — with  a 
ftatement  that  the  omiflion  was  a  miflake  of  the 
printers. 

This  method  of  dealing  with  captive  negroes  was 
not  confined  to  the  Britifh  Army  at  that  time. 

At  the  capture  of  Stony  Point  by  General  Wayne, 
three  negroes  were  taken  among  the  fpoils,  and  al 
though  we  have  not  been  able  to  determine  what  dif- 


160  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

pofition  was  finally  made  of  them,  the  following  letter 
of  General  Wayne  on  the  fubject  is  not  without  inter- 
eft  here.  Writing  from  New  Windfor  on  the  25th 
July,  1779,  to  Lieut.-Col.  Meigs,  he  fays  : 

cc  The  wifh  of  the  officers  to  free  the  three 
Negroes  after  a  few  Years  Service  meets  my  moft 
hearty  approbation,  but  as  the  Chance  of  War  or 
other  Incidents  may  prevent  the  officer  [owner]  from 
Complying  with  the  Intention  of  the  Officers,  it  will 
be  proper  for  the  purchafer  or  purchafers  to  fign  a 
Condition  in  the  Orderly  Book. 

"  .  .  .  I  would  chearfully  join  them  in  their  Im 
mediate  Manumiffion — if  a  few  days  makes  no  mate 
rial  difference,  I  could  wifh  the  fale  put  off  until  a 
Confultation  may  be  had,  and  the  opinion  of  the 
Officers  taken  on  this  Bufinefs."  Dawfons  Stony 
Point,  pp.  in,  1 1 8. 

The  difcuffions  which  arofe  out  of  the  breaches  of 
the  Treaty  of  Peace  in  1783,  which  put  negroes  on 
the  fame  footing  with  any  other  article  of  property, 
and  the  fettlement  made  by  Mr.  Jay's  Treaty  in 
1794,  furnifh  an  authoritative  ftatement  of  the  pre 
vailing  views  of  public  law  concerning  the  flatus  of 
negroes.  Hamilton,  in  his  Camillus,  No.  III.,  fays  : 

cc  Negroes,  by  the  law  of  the  States,  in  which 
flavery  is  allowed,  are  perfonal  property.  They, 
therefore,  on  the  principle  of  thofe  laws,  like  horfes, 
cattle,  and  other  moveables,  were  liable  to  become 
booty — and  belonged  to  the  enemy  [captor]  as  foon 
as  they  came  into  his  hands.'"  American  Remem 
brancer^  i.,  57. 

Gen.  Wafhington,  the  Continental  Congrefs,  and 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  161 

the  Commiflioners  appointed  by  Congrefs  in  1783  to 
fuperintend  the  embarkation  of  the  Britifh  from  New 
York,  all  concurred  in  this  view.  Indeed  the  Com- 
miffioners,  Egbert  Benfon,  William  S.  Smith,  and 
Daniel  Parker,  mowed  conclufively  that  they  had  no 
hefitation  in  confidering  negroes,  horfes,  and  other 
property,  as  being  precifely  on  the  fame  footing ;  and 
felected  a  claim  for  a  negro  as  one  of  the  ftrongeft 
that  could  be  found  to  enforce  a  compliance  with  the 
ftipulation  in  the  Seventh  Article  of  the  Treaty. 
Nor  did  the  Britifh  Miniftry  at  any  period  of  the 
negotiations  raife  any  queftion  as  to  this  doctrine. 

The  differences  of  opinion,  and  the  arguments  of 
both  parties  in  the  National  Congrefs,  only  confirm  the 
fact,  which  indeed  is  obvious  enough  from  the  language 
of  the  Article.  This  was  in  1795,  during  the  firft 
feflion  of  the  fourth  Congrefs,  when  the  Houfe  of 
Reprefentatives  embraced  many  of  the  ableft  men  in 
the  country.  Debates  on  the  Britifh  Treaty,  Part  n., 
pp.  129,  147,  253,  291—2,  301.  Papers  relative  to 
Great  Britain,  pp.  5—9. 

After  the  laft  war  with  England  fimilar  difficulties 
and  difcuffions  arofe  with  reference  to  the  firft  article 
of  the  Treaty  of  Ghent,  which  protected  the  rights  of 
our  citizens  in  their  "flaves  or  other  private  pro 
perty."  After  a  long  ftruggle  of  the  characteriftic 
diplomacy  of  Great  Britain  to  evade  it,  a  large  fum 
was  paid  as  indemnity  for  the  flaves  carried  off  in 
violation  of  the  treaty  ftipulation. 

The  doctrine  of  prize  in  negroes  fell  only  with  the 
Slave-Trade,  and  the  Courts  of  England  were  very 
flow  to  recognife  its  fall.  As  late  as  1813,  Sir  William 


1 1 


1 62  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Scott  condemned  one  hundred  and  ninety-nine  (laves, 
as  "  good  and  lawful  prize  to  the  captors,"  declaring 
at  the  fame  time  that  "flaves  are  deemed  perjonal pro 
perty,  and  pafs  to  the  captors  under  the  words  of  the 
Prize  Act,  '  Goods  or  Merchandizes/  '  i  Dodfons 
Reports,  263. 

The  earlier!  judicial  recognition,  within  our  know 
ledge,  of  the  fact  that  negroes  were  no  longer  to  be 
held  and  taken  as  cc  good  and  lawful  prize  to  the 
captors,"  was  in  the  United  States  Diftrict  Court,  in 
South  Carolina,  in  July,  1814.  It  appears  that  the 
queflion  was  regarded  as  new.  The  Court  previoufly 
had  not  proceeded  to  condemnation  of  Haves  brought 
in  as  prize  of  war ;  but  ordered  their  confinement  as 
prifoners.1  And  in  fome  cafes,  they  had  been  received 
as  fuch  by  the  Britifh  authority  resident  at  Charlefton. 
The  intereft  of  parties  requiring  a  formal  decifion  on 
the  point  of  prize,  the  libel  was  filed,  in  this  cafe, 
Jofeph  Almeida,  Captain  of  the  American  Privateer 
Caroline,  v.  Certain  Slaves.  Mr.  Juftice  Drayton  faid  he 
had  never  had  any  doubt  on  the  fubjed,  and  declared 
that  cc  Slaves  captured  in  time  of  war  cannot  be 
libelled  as  prize :  nor  will  the  Diftrid  Court  of  the 
United  States  confider  them  as  prifoners  of  war.  The 
Court  confiders  the  difpofition  of  them  as  a  matter 
of  State,  in  which  the  judiciary  fhould  not  interfere." 
Hall's  Law  Journal,  v.,  459. 

In  view  of  all  thefe  fads,  the  MafTachufetts  Re- 
folve  of  September  i6th,  1776,  juftly  challenges  our 
admiration.  It  lights  up  the  dreary  record  with  a 

1  They  were   informally  confidered  as   prifoners,   not  fo  decreed  by 
Court. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  163 

fudden  and  brilliant  glare,  as  of  a  light  mining  in 
great  darknefs.  Although  morn  of  its  magnanimous 
declaration  of  principles,  in  its  progrefs  through  the 
legiflature,  its  terms  would  ftill  introduce  a  new  theory 
and  practice  into  the  law  of  nations,  annihilating  the 
doctrine  of  prize  in  negroes,  which  had  been  every 
where  maintained  before,  and  which  continued  with 
out  queflion  elfewhere.  If  it  was  really  adhered  to, 
it  deferves  all  the  honor  that  has  been  claimed  for  it 
as  a  long  ftride  in  advance  of  all  the  world  in  civiliza 
tion  and  humanity.  But  the  Legiflature  of  Mafla- 
chufetts  could  only  regulate  the  action  of  their  own 
prize  Courts  and  their  own  citizens,  and  did  not  at 
that  time  attempt  to  give  law  to  the  whole  continent. 
They  then  recognized  the  fact  that  they  could  not 
diveft  the  title  of  flave-owners  in  the  other  Colonies 
in  captured  flaves,  and  their  obligation  to  reftore  them 
in  cafes  of  recapture.  Called  upon  to  deal  with  a 
larger  number  of  negroes,  under  circumftances  more 
embarramng  than  in  the  cafe  already  detailed,  they 
appear  to  have  been  fatisfied  with  their  own  declared 
pofition,  and  did  not  attempt  to  extend  the  principle 
of  their  new  rule  to  all  negro  flaves  who  came  or  were 
brought  within  their  jurifdiction. 

In  the  month  of  June,  1779,  the  prize-mip, 
Victoria,  was  brought  into  the  port  of  Bofton.  The 
Victoria  was  a  Spanifh  {hip  which  had  cleared  from 
South  Carolina  for  Cadiz.  On  her  paflage  me  was 
attacked  by  an  Englifh  privateer,  made  a  fuccefsful 
refiftance,  and  captured  her  aflailant,  who  had  on 
board  thirty-four  negroes  which  had  been  taken  from 
the  plantations  of  feveral  gentlemen  in  South  Carolina. 


164  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

The  Spaniard,  after  taking  the  negroes  on  board  and 
injuring  the  veffel,  difmifled  her.  A  few  days  after 
ward  the  fhip  fell  in  with  and  was  taken  by  two  Britim 
letters  of  marque  and  ordered  into  New  York.  On 
her  paflage  there  fhe  was  recaptured  by  the  Hazard 
and  Tyrannicide,  two  veflels  in  the  fervice  of  Mafla- 
chufetts,  and  brought  fafely  into  port.  On  the  21  ft 
of  June,  by  order  of  the  Board  of  War,  me  was  placed 
in  charge  of  Capt.  Johnfon,  to  direct  the  unloading, 
etc.,  in  behalf  of  the  State.  The  Board  of  War  im 
mediately  reprefented  to  the  Legiflature  the  facts 
relating  to  the  negroes  thus  "taken  on  the  high  feas 
and  brought  into  the  State;"  being  evidently  unable 
to  apply  the  refolution  of  1776  to  this  cafe. 

On  the  2jd  of  June,  1779,  it  was  ordered  in  the 
Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  "that  Gen.  Lovell,  Capt. 
Adams,  and  Mr.  Cranch  be  a  committee  to  confider 
what  is  proper  to  be  done  with  a  number  of  negroes 
brought  into  port  in  the  prize  fhip  called  the  Lady 
Gage.""  Journal,  p.  60.  The  next  day,  "the  com 
mittee  appointed  to  take  into  confideration  the  ftate 
and  circumftances  of  a  number  of  negroes  lately 
brought  into  the  port  of  Bofton,  reported  a  refolve 
directing  the  Board  of  War  to  inform  our  delegates 
in  Congrefs  of  the  ftate  of  facts  relative  to  them,  to 
put  them  into  the  barracks  on  Caftle  Ifland,  andcaufe 
them  to  be  fupplied  and  employed."  Ibid.,  pp.  63,  64. 
The  refolution  w.as  immediately  pafled  and  concurred 
in  by  the  Council.  It  appears  in  the  printed  volume, 
among  the  Refolves  of  June,  1779. 

1  This  name  of  "  Lady  Gage  "  is  probably  a  miftake,  for  this  proceed 
ing  evidently  led  to  the  refolution  of  the  following  day. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  165 

*'  CLXXX.  Refolve  on  the  Reprefentation  of  the  Board  of  War 
refpecling  a  number  of  negroes  captured  and  brought  into  this  State. 
Faffed  June  24,  1779. 

"  On  the  reprefentation  made  to  this  Court  by  the  Board  of  War, 
refpe&ing  a  number  of  negroes  brought  into  the  Port  of  Bofton,  on 
board  the  Prize  Ship  Vi&oria  : 

"  Refolved,  that  the  Board  of  War  be  and  they  are  hereby  directed 
forthwith  to  write  to  our  Delegates  in  Congrefs,  informing  them  of  the 
State  of  Fa&s  relating  to  faid  Negroes,  requefting  them  to  give  informa 
tion  thereof  to  the  Delegates  from  the  State  of  South  Carolina,  that  fo 
proper  meafures  may  be  taken  for  the  return  of  faid  Negroes,  agreeable 
to  their  defire. 

"  And  it  is  further  Refblved,  that  the  Board  of  War  be  and  they 
hereby  are  directed  to  put  the  faid  Negroes,  in  the  mean  time,  into  the 
barracks  on  Caftle  Ifland  in  the  Harbor  of  Bofton,  and  caufe  them  to 
be  fupplied  with  fuch  Provifion  and  Clothing  as  (hall  be  neceflary  for 
their  comfortable  fupport,  putting  them  under  the  care  and  direction 
of  fome  Prudent  perfon  or  Perforts,  whofe  bufinefs  it  mail  be  to  fee  that 
the  able-bodied  men  may  be  ufefully  employed  during  their  flay  in 
carrying  on  the  Fortifications  on  faid  Ifland,  or  eHewhere  within  the 
faid  Harbor ;  and  that  the  Women  be  employed  according  to  their 
ability  in  Cooking,  Warning,  etc.  And  that  the  faid  Board  of  War 
keep  an  exacl;  Account  of  their  Expenditures  in  fupporting  faid 
Negroes."  Rejolms,p.  51. 

This  refolve  was  immediately  carried  into  execu 
tion.  On  the  28th  of  June,  Edward  Revely,  the 
prize-mafter,  was  ordered  to  "  deliver  Thos.  Knox 
from  fhip  Victoria  the  Negroes  that  are  on  board 
for  the  purpofe  of  their  being  fent  to  Caftle  Ifland  pr. 
Order  of  Court/'  and  accordingly  there  were  "34 
Negroes  delivered."  At  the  fame  time,  the  Board  of 
War  ordered  the  "iffue  to  the  Negroes  at  Caftle 
Ifland — i  Ib.  of  Beef,  i  Ib.  of  Rice  pr.  day,"  upon  the 
orders  of  Lt.-Col.  Revere,  the  commandant  of  Caftle 


1 66  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Ifland.  Minutes  Board  of  *  War*  His  letter  ofinftruc- 
tions  from  the  Board  is  as  follows : 

"  War  Office,  28  June,  1779. 

cc  Lt.-Col.  Revere, 

"  Agreeable  to  a  Refolve  of  Court  we  fend  to 
Cattle  Ifland  and  place  under  your  care  the  following 
Negroes,  viz. : 

[19]   Men, 

[10]  Women, 

[  5]   Children, 

lately  brought  into  this  Port  in  the  Spanim  retaken 
Ship  Victoria.  The  Men  are  to  be  employed  on  the 
Fortifications  there  or  elfewhere  in  the  Harbor,  in  the 
moil  ufeful  manner,  and  the  Women  and  Children, 
according  to  their  ability,  in  Cooking,  Warning,  etc. 
They  are  to  be  allowed  for  their  fubfiftence  One  Ib. 
of  Bee£  and  one  Ib.  of  Rice  per  day  each,  which  Com- 
miflary  Salifbury  will  furnifh  upon  your  order,  and 
this  to  continue  until  our  further  orders, 

cc  By  Order  of  the  Board." 

In  accordance  with  the  refolve  of  Court,  the  Board 
of  War,  by  their  Prefident,  Samuel  P.  Savage,  ad- 
drefled  a  letter  to  Meflrs.  Gerry,  Lovell,  Holten, 
etc.,  etc.,  delegates  from  MafTachufetts  in  the  Conti 
nental  Congrefs,  dated  War  Office,  29 th  June,  1779, 
in  which  are  fet  forth  the  principal  facts  in  the  cafe, 
and  the  inftrudions  of  the  Legiflature.  In  conclufion, 
the  Prefident  fays,  cc  Every  neceflary  for  the  fpeedy 
difcharge  of  thefe  people,  we  have  no  doubt  you  will 
take,  that  as  much  expenfe  as  poflible  may  be  faved 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  167 

to  thofe  who  call  themfelves  their  owners."  This 
letter  alfo  gives  the  number  of  the  negroes,  and  the 
names  of  the  feveral  gentlemen  from  whofe  plantations 
they  were  taken,  viz. : 

"  5  Men  4  Women  4  Boys  i  Girl  belonging  to 
Mr.  Wm.  Vryne. 

"9  Men  i  Woman  belonging  to  Mr.  Anthony 
Pawley. 

"  i  Man  belonging  to  Mr.  Thomas  Todd. 

"  2  Men  3  Women  belonging  to  Mr.  Henry 
Lewis. 

<c  2  Men  2  Women  belonging  to  Mr.  William 
Pawley. 

"  One  of  the  negroes  is  an  elderly  fenfible  man, 
calls  himfelf  James,  and  fays  he  is  free,  which  we  have 
no  reafon  to  doubt  the  truth  of.  He  alfo  fays  that 
he  with  the  reft  of  the  Negroes  were  taken  from  a 
place  called  Georgetown."  Mafs.  Archives,  Vol.  151, 
292-94. 

Thefe  negroes  were  not  all  detained  at  Caftle 
Ifland,  until  their  owners  were  heard  from.  One 
method  of  providing  for  them  is  noticed  in  the  fol 
lowing  extract : 

"  In  1779,  Col.  Paul  Revere,  who  commanded 
there  [Caftle  Ifland]  had  feveral  orders  from  the 
Council  to  let  part  of  them  [negroes  quartered  on  the 
Ifland]  live  as  fervants,  with  perfons  in  different 
towns.  An  exprefs  condition  of  fuch  licenfe  was, 
they  fhould  be  returned  whenever  the  public  authori 
ties  required."  Felt:  Coll.  Am.  Stat.  Affoc.,  i.,  206-7. 

Thefe  orders  of  the  Council  began  as  foon  as  the 
negroes  were  fent  to  the  Ifland,  the  firft  one  we  have 


1 68  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

found  bearing  date  June  joth,  1779^  by  which  Mr. 
Jofhua  Brackett  was  to  have  a  Negro  Boy  "  fuch  as 
he  may  choofe,"  etc.  Mafs.  Archives^  VoL  175,  374. 
See  alfo  fimilar  order  for  three  Negro  Boys  to  be 
delivered  to  Hon.  Henry  Gardner,  July  5,  1779. 
/«/.,  385- 

Moft  of  them,  however,  muft  have  remained  at 
Caftle  Ifland,  as  appears  from  a  return  of  the  negroes 
there,  October  I2th,  1779.  It  is  a  fingular  circum- 
ftance  that  fuch  a  return  mould  be  made,  apparently 
to  the  Legiflature,  with  a  brief  and  touching  report, 
from  John  Hancock — one  of  the  moft  interefting 
documents  connected  with  this  fubject.  The  original, 
from  which  we  copy,  is  in  the  Mafs.  Archives,  Fol. 
142,  170.  The  portions  which  are  in  italics  are  in  the 
autograph  of  Hancock. 

BOSTON,  Oftr.  12,  1779.     A  Return  of  y"  Negroes  at  Caftle  Ifland, 
Viz.  : 

Negro  Men. 

1.  ANTHONY.  9.  JACK. 

2.  PARTRICK.  10.  GYE. 

3.  PADDE.  II.  JUNE. 

4.  ISAAC.  12.  RHODICK. 

5.  QUASH.  13.  JACK. 

6.  BOBB.  14.  FULLER. 

7.  ANTHONEY  15.  LEWIS. 

8.  ADAM. 

The  above  men  arejlout  fellows. 

Negro  Boys. 

No.  i.  SMART. 
2.  RICHARD. 

Boys  veryfmall. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  169 

Negro  Woomen.  Negro  Girls. 

No.  i.  KITTEY.  No.  i.  LYSETT. 

2.  LUCY.  2.  SALLY. 

3.  MILLEY.  3.  MERCY. 

4.  LANDER. 

Pretty  large.  Rather Jlout. 

Gentlemen, 

The  Scituation  of  thefe  Negroes  is  pitiable  with,  refpecl  to 
Cloathing. 

I  am.  Gen*. 

Your  very  hum.  Serv*. 

John  Hancock? 

Oft.   12,   1779. 

On  the  1 5th  of  November,  1779,  a  petition  was 
read  in  the  Council,  from  Ifaac  Smith,  John  Codman> 
and  William  Smith,  in  behalf  of  William  Vereen  and 
others,  of  the  State  of  South  Carolina,  then  in  Bofton, 
praying  that  a  number  of  Negroes  which  were  taken 
from  them  by  a  Britim  privateer,  and  retaken  by  two 
armed  vefTels  belonging  to  Maflachufetts,  might  be 
delivered  to  them.  The  Council,  upon  hearing  the 
petition,  ordered  cc  that  Mofes  Gill,  Efq.,  with  fuch 
as  the  Honorable  Houfe  mall  join,  be  a  Committee 
to  take  into  confideration  this  petition,  and  report 
what  may  be  proper  to  be  done  thereon."  The 
refolution  was  immediately  fent  to  the  Houfe,  who 
concurred,  and  joined  Capt.  Williams  of  Salem,  and 
Mr.  Davis  of  Bofton,  for  the  Committee. 

On  the  1 7th  of  November,  another  petition  was 
prefented  in  Council,  from  John  Winthrop,  "  pray- 

1  John  Hancock  had  been  appointed  "  Captain  of  the  Caftle  and  Fort 
on  Governor's  Ifland,"  on  the  6th  of  Oftober,  1779.  Refolves,  CLXXVIII, 
p.  in.  Compare  Journal,  pp.  54,  60. 


i  jo  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

ing  that  certain  negroes,  who  were  brought  into  this 
State  by  the  Hazard  and  tyrannicide,  may  be  delivered 
to  him."  This  petition  was  alfo  committed  to  the 
"  committee  appointed  on  the  petition  of  Ifaac  Smith 
and  others,"  by  a  concurrent  vote  of  both  Houfes. 

On  the  1 8th  of  November,  "  Jabez  Fiiher,  Efq., 
brought  down  a  report  of  the  Committee  of  both 
Houfes  on  the  petition  of  Ifaac  Smith,  being  by  way 
of  refolve,  directing  the  Board  of  War  to  deliver  fo 
many  of  the  negroes  therein  mentioned,  as  are  now 
alive.  Faffed  in  Council,  and  fent  down  for  concur 
rence."  The  order  of  the  Houfe  is,  cc  Read  and  con 
curred,  as  taken  into  a  new  draught."  Sent  up  for 
concurrence." 

It  is  printed  among  the  refolves  of  November, 

I/79- 

"  XXXI.    Refolve    relinquiming   this    State's  claim  to   a  number  of 

Negroes,  pafled  November  1 8,  1779. 

"  Whereas  a  number  of  negroes  were  re-captured  and  brought  into 
this  State  by  the  armed  veflels  Hazard  and  Tyrannicide,  and  have  fmce 
been  fupported  at  the  expenfe  of  this  State,  and  as  the  original  owners 
of  faid  Negroes  now  apply  for  them  : 

"  Therefore  Refolved^  That  this  Court  hereby  relinquiih  and  give 
up  any  claim  they  may  have  upon  the  faid  owners  for  re-capturing  faid 
negroes :  Provided  they  pay  to  the  Board  of  War  of  this  State  the  ex- 
pence  that  has  arifen  for  the  fupport  and  cloathing  of  the  Negroes 
aforefaid."  Refolves,  p.  131.* 

The  Maffachufetts  act  of  April  12,  1780,  more 
effectually  providing  for  the  fecurity,  fupport,  and 
exchange  of  prifoners  of  war  brought  into  the  State, 

1  The  original  refolve  is  in  Mafs.  Archives,  Vol.  142,  29,  and  is  en- 
dorfed  "  Negroes  captured  in  the  fhip  Viaoria,"  and  "  Entered  page  454." 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  171 

was  patted  in  accordance  with  the  Refolutions  of 
Congrefs,  adopted  January  ijth,  1780.  Laws,  1780, 
Chap,  v.,  pp.  283,  4.  It  declares  with  reference  to 
<c  all  Prifoners  of  War,  whether  captured  by  the  Army 
or  Navy  of  the  United  States,  or  armed  Ships  or 
VerTels  of  any  of  the  United  States,  or  by  the  Subjects, 
Troops,  Ships,  or  Veflels  of  War  of  this  State,  and 
brought  into  the  fame,  or  caft  on  more  by  fhipwreck 

on  the  coaft  thereof ,  all  fuch  prifoners,  fo 

brought  in  or  caft  on  more  (including  Indians,  Ne 
groes,  and  Molatoes)  be  treated  in  all  refpects  as 
prifoners  of  war  to  the  United  States,  any  law  or  re- 
folve  of  this  Court  to  the  contrary  notwithftanding." 
A  previous  law  of  1777,  repealed  by  this  act,  con 
tained  no  fpecial  provifion  concerning  this  clafs  of 
captures.  Laws,  1777,  Chap,  xxxv.,  p.  114. 

On  Friday,  the  2jd  of  January,  1784,  Governor 
Hancock  fent  a  meflage  to  the  Legiflature,  tranfmit- 
ting  papers  received  during  the  recefs  from  October 
28th,  1783,  to  January  2ift,  1784,  "among  which  (he 
fays)  is  one  from  his  Excellency  the  Governor  of 
South  Carolina,  refpecting  the  detention  of  fome 
Negroes  here,  belonging  to  the  fubjects  of  that  State. 
I  have  communicated  it  to  the  Judges  of  the  Supreme 
Judicial  Court — their  obfervations  upon  it  are  with 
the  Papers.  I  have  made  no  reply  to  the  letter, 
judging  it  beft  to  have  your  decifion  upon  it." 
Journal  H.  of  R.,  Vol.  iv.,  pp.  308,  9.  The  Secretary, 
in  communicating  the  meflage  to  the  Houfe,  faid  he 
had  laid  the  papers  before  the  Senate,  with  his  Ex 
cellency's  requeft  to  fend  them  to  the  Houfe.  Ibid., 
p.  310. 


172  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

On  the  fame  day,  in  the  Senate,  the  meflage  was 
read  with  accompanying  papers,  and  referred  to  a 
joint  committee  of  both  Houfes.  Senate  Journal,  iv., 
277.  Houfe  Journal,  iv.,  311. 

On  the  23d  of  March  following,  a  report  of  the 
committee,  "  by  way  of  order,"  was  read  and  accepted 
in  the  Senate,  and  concurred  in  by  the  Houfe.  Senate 
Journal,  iv.,  441.  In  the  Houfe,  "The  Hon.  Mr. 
Warner  brought  down  the  report  of  the  Committee  on 
Governor  GerrardV  letter,  being  an  Order  requefting 
his  Excellency  the  Governor  to  tranfmit  a  copy  of  the 
opinions  of  the  Judges  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court 
on  the  cafe  complained  of,  for  the  information  of  the 
faid  Governor  Gerrard."  Houfe  Journal,  iv.,  496. 
The  order  is  printed  among  the  Refolves,  March, 
1784. 

"  CLXXI.  Order  requefting  the  Governor  to  write  to 
Governor  Guerard  of  South  Carolina,  inclofing  the 
letter  of  the  Judges  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court, 
March  2jd,  1784. 

"  Ordered,  that  his  Excellency  the  Governor  be  re- 
quefted  to  write  to  Excellency  Benjamin  Guerard, 
Governor  of  South  Carolina,  inclofing  for  the  informa 
tion  of  Governor  Guerard,  the  letter  of  the  Judges  of 
the  Supreme  Judicial  Court  of  this  Commonwealth, 
with  the  copy  in  the  faid  letter  referred  to,  upon  the 
fubject  of  Governor  Guerard* 's  letter,  dated  the  fixth 
Odober,  1783."  p.  141. 

1  Benjamin  Guerard  was  Governor  of  the  State  of  South  Carolina  from 
1783  to  1785. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  173 

We  have  made  diligent  efforts  to  find  the  papers 
referred  to  among  the  files  preferved  in  the  State- 
El  oufe  at  Bofton,  but  without  fuccefs.  We  have  alfo 
endeavored  to  procure  them  from  the  Archives  of  the 
State  of  South  Carolina,  with  no  more  fatisfactory 
refult.  Fortunately,  however,  we  have  been  favored 
with  the  following  extracts  and  memorandum,  which 
were  made  by  Mr.  Bancroft  at  Columbia,  S.  C.,  feveral 
years  ago. 

From  Mr.  Bancroft's  MSS.,  America,  1783,  Vol.  n. 

GOVERNOR  GUERARD  TO  GOVERNOR  HANCOCK, 
6th  October,  1783. 

EXTRACT.  "  That  fuch  adoption  is  favoring  rather 
of  the  Tyranny  of  Great  Britain  which  occafioned  her 
the  lofs  of  thefe  States — that  no  act  of  Britifh  Tyranny 
could  exceed  the  encouraging  the  negroes  from  the 
State  owning  them  to  defert  their  owners  to  be 
emancipated — that  it  feems  arbitrary  and  domination 
— afluming  for  the  Judicial  Department  of  any  one 
State,  to  prevent  a  reftoration  voted  by  the  Legifla- 
ture  and  ordained  by  Congrefs.  That  the  liberation 
of  our  negroes  difclofed  a  fpecimen  of  Puritanifm  I 
mould  not  have  expected  from  gentlemen  of  my  Pro- 
feffion." 

MEMORANDUM.  cc  He  had  demanded  fugitives, 
carried  off  by  the  Britifh,  captured  by  the  North,  and 
not  given  up  by  the  interference  of  the  Judiciary/' 
"  Governor  Hancock  referred  the  fubject  to  the 
Judges." 


174  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

JUDGES   GUSHING   AND   SARGENT   TO   GOVERNOR 
HANCOCK,  Bofton,  Dec.  20,  1783. 

EXTRACT.  "  How  this  determination  is  an  attack 
upon  the  fpirit,  freedom,  dignity,  independence,  and 
fovereignty  of  South  Carolina,  we  are  unable  to  con 
ceive.  That  this  has  any  connection  with,  or  relation 
to  Puritanifm,  we  believe  is  above  yr  Excellency's 
comprehenfion  as  it  is  above  ours.  We  mould  be 
fincerely  forry  to  do  anything  inconfiflent  with  the 
Union  of  the  States,  which  is  and  mufl  continue  to  be 
the  ban's  of  our  Liberties  and  Independence;  on  the 
contrary  we  wim  it  may  be  ftrengthened,  confirmed, 
and  endure  for  ever." 

Whether  Governor  Hancock  recognized  in  the 
fubjects  of  this  correfpondence  any  of  his  old  Caftle 
Ifland  acquaintances,  does  not  appear ;  but  we  enter 
tain  no  doubt  that  they  were  the  fame,  or  a  part  of  the 
fame  negroes  whofe  "  pitiable"  condition  "with  refpect 
to  cloathing,"  he  had  reported  to  the  authorities  in 
October,  1779.  Why  or  how  it  happened  that  any  of 
them  were  ftill  within  the  jurifdiction  of  Maflachufetts, 
we  cannot  explain.  The  exigencies  of  the  war  in 
South  Carolina,  which  was  threatened  or  invaded  and 
overrun  during  the  greater  part  of  the  intervening 
period  (1779-83),  may  have  prevented  fome  of  the 
owners  from  profecuting  promptly  their  intention  to 
reclaim  their  flaves  or  returning  with  them  to  that 
State.  The  flaves  themfelves  may  have  become 
familiar  with  their  new  homes,  and  willing  or  defirous 
to  remain  with  their  new  matters  in  the  various  towns 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  175 

to  which  they  had  been  fcattered,  and  where  they  had 
been  permitted  to  live  under  the  orders  of  Council, 
and  their  new  matters  may  have  become  warmly  in- 
terefted  in  the  defire  to  keep  them.  Under  fuch  cir- 
cumftances  the  authorities  may  have  found  it  difficult 
to  obtain  a  compliance  with  the  agreement  to  return 
them  when  called  for,  without  enforcing  the  reclama 
tion  in  the  courts  of  law.  Add  to  all  this,  the  dif- 
pofition  of  fome  of  the  Supreme  Court  judges  cc  to 
fubftitute  an  unwritten  higher  law,  interpreted  by 
individual  confcience,  for  th,e  law  of  the  land  and  the 
decrees  of  human  tribunals" — and  we  mall  not  be  fur- 
prifed  at  the  refult  indicated  in  thefe  imperfect  me 
morials  of  the  proceedings  in  17835*84. 

We  may  expect  from  future  refearches  in  Mafla- 
chufetts  more  light  on  this  as  well  as  other  points 
indicated  in  thefe  Notes  ;  and  we  truft  efpecially  that 
thefe  deficiencies  may  cc  compel  a  difcovery "  of  the 
opinions  of  the  Judges.  They  would  furnim  an  ex 
tremely  important  illuftration  of  the  ftate  and  progrefs 
of  anti-flavery  ideas  in  1783,  bearing  directly  on  the 
conftruction  of  the  Constitution  of  1780,  which  we 
have  ftill  to  difcufs.  The  only  additional  item  we  have 
found  which  may  bear  on  this  cafe  is  the  following : 

In  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court  of  the  Common 
wealth  of  Maflachufetts,  Suffolk,  26th  Auguft,  1783, 
the  following  named  negroes  were  brought  up  on 
habeas  corpus  and  difcharged,  the  Court  declaring  the 
mittimus  inefficient  to  hold  them. 

Affa  Hall,  wife  of  Prince  Hall, 
Quafh,  Robert, 


176  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

John  Polly,  Anthony, 

Jack  Phillips,  Peggy*  wife  of  faid  An- 

George  Polly,  thony. 

Records,  1783,  fol.  177,  178. 


VIII. 

WE  return  again  to  trace  the  progrefs  of  public 
opinion  on  flavery  in  MafTachufetts  during  the  Revo 
lution.  It  is  indicated  in  part  by  the  public  prefs  of 
the  time.  William  Gordon,  afterward  well  known  as 
the  author  of  a  hiftory  of  the  Revolution,  was  very 
bufy  as  a  writer  on  this  and  kindred  topics.  In 
Letter  V  (of  a  feries),  dated  Roxbury,  September  21, 
1776,  he  fays : 

cc  The  Virginians  begin  their  Declaration  of  Rights 
with  faying,  c  that  all  men  are  born  equally  free  and 
independent,  and  have  certain  inherent  natural  rights, 
of  which  they  cannot,  by  any  compact,  deprive  them- 
felves  or  their  pofterity  ;  among  which  are  the  enjoy 
ment  of  life  and  liberty.'  The  Congrefs  declare  that 
they  c  hold  thefe  truths  to  be  felf-evident,  that  all 
men  are  created  equal,  that  they  are  endowed  by  their 
Creator  with  certain  unalienable  rights,  that  among 
thefe  are  life,  liberty  and  purfuit  of  happinefs.'  The 
Continent  has  rang  with  affirmations  of  the  like  im 
port.  If  thefe,  Gentlemen,  are  our  genuine  fentiments, 
and  we  are  not  provoking  the  Deity,  by  acting  hypo 
critically  to  ferve  a  turn,  let  us  apply  earneftly  and 
heartily  to  the  extirpation  of  flavery  from  among  our- 
felves.  Let  the  State  allow  of  nothing  beyond  fervi- 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  177 

tude  for  a  ftipulated  number  of  years,  and  that  only 
for  feven  or  eight,  when  perfons  are  of  age,  or  till 
they  are  of  age  :  and  let  the  defcendants  of  the  Afri 
cans  born  among  us,  be  viewed  as  free-born ;  and 
be  wholly  at  their  own  difpofal  when  one-and- twenty, 
the  latter  part  of  which  age  will  compenfate  for  the 
expenfe  of  infancy,  education,  and  fo  on.1" 

In  the  Independent  Chronicle,  November  14, 1776, 
there  is  a  Plan  for  the  gradual  extermination  of  flav- 
ery  out  of  the  Colony  of  Connecticut.  It  was  fent  to 
the  publifhers  by  Dr.  Gordon,  from  Roxbury,  Nov. 
2,  1776.  This  plan  is  very  fevere  on  flaveholders, 
and  portraying  the  death-bed  fcene  of  one  of  them, 
raifes  the  query,  whether  he  is  finner  or  faint  ?  Gordon 
himfelf  fays,  <c  I  mall  fay  nothing  further  of  the  plan, 
than  that,  tho'  I  am  well  pleafed,  to  have  the  abfur- 
dity  of  perpetuating  flavery  expofed,  I  am  not  for 
unfainting  every  man  that  through  the  power  of 
prevailing  prejudice  and  cuftom,  is  chargeable  with 
inconfiftency  and  abfurdity :  for  if  fo,  who  then  can 
befaved?" 

A  "  Son  of  Liberty "  writes  vigoroufly  againft 
flavery  in  the  Independent  Chronicle,  November  28, 
1776.  He  calls  loudly  for  legiflation,  etc,,  "that  no 
laws  be  in  exiftence  contrary  to  found  reafon  and 
revelation." 

At  this  period,  advertifements  of  flave-property 
were  common  in  the  newfpapers.  We  quote  a  few 
fpecimens  : 

1  The  methods  propofed  in  this  letter  do  not  give  any  countenance  to 
the  modern  theories  that  flavery  was  illegal,  and  that  hereditary  flavery  was 
always  contrary  to  law  in  Maflachufetts. 

12 


178  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 

From  the  Independent  Chronicle,  Oftober  3,  1776. 

"  To  be  SOLD  A  ftout,  hearty,  likely  NEGRO 
GIRL,  fit  for  either  Town  or  Country.  Inquire  of 
Mr.  Andrew  Gillefpie,  Dorchejler,  Odo.  i., 


From  the  fame,  Oftober  10. 

"  A  hearty  NEGRO  MAN,  with  a  fmall  fum  of 
Money  to  be  given  away." 

From  the  fame,  November  28. 

"  To  SELL—  A  Hearty  likely  NEGRO  WENCH 
about  12  or  13  Years  of  Age,  has  had  the  Small 
Pox,  can  walh,  iron,  card,  and  fpin,  etc.,  for  no 
other  Fault  but  for  want  of  Employ." 

From  the  fame,  February  27,  1777. 

"  WANTED  a  NEGRO  GIRL  between  12  and 
20  Years  of  Age,  for  which  a  good  Price  will  be 
given,  if  ihe  can  be  recommended." 

From  the  Continental  Journal,  April  3,  1777. 

"  To  be  SOLD,  a  likely  NEGRO  MAN,  twenty- 
two  years  old,  has  had  the  fmall-  pox,  can  do  any 
fort  of  bufinefs  ;  fold  for  want  of  employment." 

"  To  be  SOLD,  a  large,  commodious  Dwell 
ing  Houfe,  Barn,  and  Outhoufes,  with  any  quan 
tity  of  land  from  I  to  50  acres,  as  the  Purchafer 
mail  choofe  within  5  miles  of  Boflon.  Alfo  a 
fmart  well-tempered  NEGRO  BOY  of  14  years  old, 
not  to  go  out  of  this  State  and  fold  for  1  5  years 
only,  if  he  continues  to  behave  well." 

From  the  Independent  Chronicle,  May  8,  1777. 

"  To  be  SOLD,  for  want  of  employ,  a  likely 
ftrong  NEGRO  GIRL,  about  18  years  old,  under- 
ftands  all  forts  of  houfehold  bufinefs,  and  can  be 
well  recommended." 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  179 

Thefe  and  fimilar  advertifements  drew  forth  the 
following  communication  to  the  Printers  from  Dr. 
Gordon ;  but  without  any  immediate  effect,  if  we  may 
judge  from  the  fact  that  the  laft  advertifement  above 
was  continued  in  the  fame  paper  in  which  was  pub- 
limed 

MR-  GORDON'S  HINT  ON  SLAVERY. 

Independent  Chronicle,  May  15,  1777. 

€<  Meflleurs  Printers, 

"  I  WOULD  hope  that  you  are  the  Sons  of  Liberty 
from  principle,  and  not  merely  from  intereft,  wifh  you 
therefore  to  be  conflftent,  and  never  more  to  admit  the 
fale  of  negroes,  whether  boys  or  girls,  to  be  advertifed 
in  your  papers.  Such  advertisements  in  the  prefent 
feafon  are  peculiarly  mocking.  The  multiplicity  of 
bufinefs  that  hath  been  before  the  General  Court  may 
apologize  for  their  not  having  attended  to  the  cafe  of 
flaves,  but  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  they  will  have  an 
opportunity  hereafter,  and  will,  by  an  Act  of  the  State, 
put  a  final  flop  to  the  public  and  private  fale  of  them, 
which  may  be  fome  help  towards  eradicating  flavery 
from  among  us.  If  God  hath  made  of  one  blood,  all 
nations  of  men,  for  to  dwell  on  all  the  face  of  the 
earth,  I  can  fee  no  reafon  why  a  black  rather  than  a 
white  man  mould  be  a  flave. 

"  Your  humble  Servant, 

"WILLIAM  GORDON. 

"  N.  B.  I  mean  the  above  as  a  hint  alfo  to  the 
other  printers." 

But  although  the  Bofton  newfpapers  ftill  continued 
to  advertife  flave-property,  and,  as  we  mall  hereafter 


180  Notes  on  the  Hiflory  of 

fee,  in  a  manner  even  more  mocking  to  the  modern 
reader,  it  is  to  this  period  we  are  to  refer  the  laft 
attempt  in  the  Legiflature  to  put  an  end  to  flavery  in 
Maflachufetts.  It  is  the  moft  emphatic,  if  indeed  it 
is  not  the  only  direct,  attack  made  on  that  inflitution 
in  all  their  legislation.  The  Legiflature  were  alfo  at 
this  time  beginning  their  firft  eflay  at  conftitution- 
making — the  eftabliftiment  of  a  new  fyftem  of  govern 
ment  for  the  State.  The  failure  of  this  attack  on 
flavery  was  as  (ignal  and  complete  as  poffible,  while 
the  method  by  which  it  was  accomplished  prefents  a 
curious  illuftration  of  the  growth  of  the  fentiment  and 
principle  of  nationality.  It  is  not  amifs  to  remember^ 
that  in  the  firft  and  lafl  and  only  direct  and  formal 
attempt  to  abolim  flavery  in  Maflachufetts,  the  pop 
ular  branch  of  the  Legiflature  of  that  State  laid  the 
bill  for  that  purpofe  on  the  table,  with  a  direction 
cc  that  application  be  made  to  Congrefs  on  the  fubject 
thereof." 

On  the  1 8th  of  March,  1777,  another  petition 
of  MarTachufetts  flaves  was  prefented  to  the  Legis 
lature,  as  appears  from  the  following  entry  on  the 
Journal  of  that  date  : 

£C  A  petition  of  Lancafter  Hill,  and  a  number  of 
other  negroes,  praying  the  Court  to  take  into  con- 
fideration  their  ftate  of  bondage,  and  pafs  an  act 
whereby  they  may  be  reftored  to  the  enjoyment  of 
that  freedom  which  is  the  natural  right  of  all  men. 
Read  and  committed  to  Judge  Sergeant,  Mr.  Dalton, 
Mr.  Appleton,  Col.  Brooks,  and  Mr.  Story." 

The  original  petition  is  preferved  among  the 
Archives  of  MarTachufetts,  and  furnifhes  fome  addi- 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  181 

tional  interefting  particulars.  They  pray  for  the 
pafTage  of  an  ad,  "  whereby  they  may  be  reftored  to 
the  enjoyment  of  that  freedom,  which  is  the  natural 
right  of  all  men,  and  their  children  (who  were  born  in 
this  land' of  liberty]  may  not  be  held  as  Jlaves  after  they 
arrive  at  the  age  of  twenty-one  years.'9  The  petition  is 
figned  by  Lancafter  Hill,  Peter  Befs,  Brifler  Slenfen, 
Prince  Hall,  Jack  Pierpont  (his  X  mark),  Nero 
Funelo  (his  X  mark),  and  Newport  Sumner  (his  X 
mark).  It  bears  date  January  ijth,  1777,  and  has 
the  following  endorfement:  "  Mar.  18.  Judge  Ser 
geant,  Mr.  Dalton,  Mr.  Appleton,  Coll.  Brooks, 
Mr.  Story,  Mr.  Lowell  and  to  confider  ye  matter  at 
large  Mr.  Davis/'  Majs.  Archives,  Revolutionary 
Refolves,  Vol.  vn.,  f.  132. 

The  addition  of  cc  Mr.  Lowell  and  to  confider  ye 
matter  at  large  Mr.  Davis  "  indicates  further  proceed 
ings,  which  we  are  unable  to  give,  in  confequence  of 
the  deficiencies  in  all  the  copies  of  the  Journals  known 
to  us.  The  action  of  the  Legiflature,  however,  refult- 
ed  in  a  bill,  which  was  probably  drawn  by  Judge 
Sargent,  who  was  the  firfl  named  of  this  committee. 

On  Monday  afternoon,  June  9th,  1777,  "  a  Bill 
entitled  an  Act  for  preventing  the  Practice  of  hold 
ing  perfons  in  Slavery "  was  cc  read  a  firft  time,  and 
ordered  to  be  read  again  on  Friday  next,  at  10  o'clock, 
A.  M,"  Journ.y  19.  On  the  ijth,  the  bill  was  "  read 
a  fecond  time,  and  after  Debate  thereon,  it  was  moved 
and  feconded,  That  the  fame  lie  upon  the  Table, 
and  that  Application  be  made  to  Congrefs  on  the 
fubject  thereof;  and  the  Queftion  being  put,  it 
pafled  in  the  Affirmative,  and  Mr.  Speaker,  Mr. 


1 82  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Wendell,  and  Col.  Orne,  were  appointed  a  Com 
mittee  to  prepare  a  letter  to  Congrefs  accordingly,  and 
report."  Journ.,  25.  On  the  following  day,  Satur 
day,  June  1 4th,  "  the  Committee  appointed  to  prepare 
a  Letter  to  Congrefs,  on  the  fubjecl:  of  the  Bill  for 
preventing  the  Practice  of  holding  Perfons  in  Slavery, 
reported."  Their  report  was  "  Read  and  Ordered  to 
lie."  Journ.y  25.  We  find  no  further  trace  of  it. 

"STATE  OF  MASSACHUSETTS  BAY.     IN  THE  YEAR  OF  OUR  LORD,  1777. 
"  An  aft  for  preventing  the  praftice  of  holding  perfons  in  Slavery, 

tf  WHEREAS,  the  praftice  of  holding  Africans  and  the  children  born 
of  them,  or  any  other  perfons,  in  Slavery,  is  unjustifiable  in  a  civil 
government,  at  a  time  when  they  are  afTerting  their  natural  freedom  ; 
wherefore,  for  preventing  fuch  a  practice  for  the  future,  and  eftabliming 
to  every  perfbn  refiding  within  the  State  the  invaluable  blefling  of 
liberty. 

"Be  it  Enaffed,  by  the  Council  and  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives^ 
in  General  Court  aflembled,  and  by  the  authority  of  the  fame, — That 
all  perfons,  whether  black  or  of  other  complexion,  above  2 1  years  of 
age,  now  held  in  Slavery,  mall,  from  and  after  the  day  of 

next,  be  free  from  any  fubjeftion  to  any  mafter  or  miftrefs,  who 
have  claimed  their  fervitude  by  right  of  purchafe,  heirlhip,  free  gift,  or 
otherwife,  and  they  are  hereby  entitled  to  all  the  freedom,  rights,  priv 
ileges  and  immunities  that  do,  or  ought  of  right  to  belong  to  any  of  the 
fubjects  of  this  State,  any  ufage  or  oiftom  to  the  contrary  notwith 
standing. 

"  And  be  it  Enaded,  by  the  authority  aforefaidr  that  all  written 
deeds,  bargains,  fales  or  conveyances,  or  contracts  without  writing, 
whatfoever,  for  conveying  or  transferring  any  property  in  any  perfon, 
or  to  the  fervice  and  labor  of  any  perfon  whatfoever,  of  more  than 
twenty-one  years  of  age,  to  a  third  perfon,  except  by  order  of  fome 
court  of  record  for  fome  crime,  that  has  been,  or  hereafter  fhall  be 
made,  or  by  their  own  voluntary  contract  for  a  term  not  exceeding 
feven  years,  fhall  be  and  hereby  are  declared  null  and  void. 

"  And  WHEREAS,  divers  perfons  now  have  in  their  fervice  negroes, 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  183 

mulattoes  or  others  who  have  been  deemed  their  flaves  or  property,  and 
who  are  now  incapable  of  earning  their  living  by  reafon  of  age  or  in 
firmities,  and  may  be  defirous  of  continuing  in  the  fervice  of  their  mas 
ters  or  miftrefles, — be  it  therefore.  Enabled,  by  the  authority  aforefaid, 
that  whatever  negro  or  mulatto,  who  mall  be  defirous  of  continuing  in 
the  fervice  of  his  mafter  or  miftrefs,  and  (hall  voluntarily  declare  the 
fame  before  two  juftices  of  the  County  in  which  faid  mafter  or  miftrefs 
refides,  mail  have  a  right  to  continue  in  the  fervice,  and  to  a  mainte 
nance  from  their  mafter  or  miftrefs,  and  if  they  are  incapable  of  earning 
their  living,  mail  be  fupported  by  the  faid  mafter  or  miftrefs,  or  their 
heirs,  during  the  lives  of  faid  fervants,  anything  in  this  a6l  to  the  con 
trary  notwithftanding. 

"  Provided,  neverthelefs,  that  nothing  in  this  aft  mail  be  under- 
ftood  to  prevent  any  mafter  of  a  veflel  or  other  perfon  from  bringing 
into  this  State  any  perfons,  not  Africans,  from  any  other  part  of  the 
world,  except  the  United  States  of  America,  and  felling  their  fervice 
for  a  term  of  time  not  exceeding  five  years,  if  twenty-one  years  of  age, 
or,  if  under  twenty-one,  not  exceeding  the  time  when  he  or  fhe  fo 
brought  into  the  State  fhall  be  twenty-fix  years  of  age,  to  pay  for  and 
in  confideration  of  the  tranfportation  and  other  charges  faid  mafter  of 
veflel  or  other  perfon  may  have  been  at,  agreeable  to  contracts  made 
with  the  perfons  fo  tranfported,  or  their  parents  or  guardians  in  their 
behalf,  before  they  are  brought  from  their  own  country."  Mafs. 
Archives :  Revolutionary  Refolves,  Vol.  vii.t  p.  133. 

An  endorfement  on  the  bill  is,  "  Ordered  to  lie 
till  the  fecond  Wednefday  of  the  next  Seflion  of  the 
General  Court."  It  was  not  taken  up  at  that  time, 
nor  at  any  other  time  that  we  can  difcover. 

We  have  faid  that  Judge  Sargent  was  probably  the 
author  of  this  bill.  He  was  a  very  ftrong  advocate 
of  anti-flavery  doctrines,  and  fubfequently,  in  his  career 
as  a  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court,  had  a  principal 
agency  in  accomplishing  the  overthrow  of  flavery  by 
judicial  conftruclion,  without  the  aid  of  legislation  in 
which  he  had  failed. 


184  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

There  is  among  the  archives  of  MafTachufetts  the 
following  draft  of  a  bill,  evidently  the  original  of  the 
preceding  aft,  which  appears  to  have  been  written  by 
Judge  Sargent  on  the  back  of  a  note  addrefTed  to  him 
by  Rev.  Dr.  Eliot3  an  eminent  minifter  of  Bofton 
who  took  a  very  prominent  part  in  the  patriotic  pro 
ceedings  of  the  Revolutionary  period. 

"IN    YK    YEAR    OF    OUR   LORD     1/77. 

"  AN  ACT  for  preventing  ye  wicked  &  unnatural  Practice  of  holding 
Perfons  in  Slavery. 

"WHEREAS  ye  unnatural  practice  in  this  ftate  of  holding  certain 
Perfons  in  Slavery,  more  particularly  thofe  tranfported  from  Africa  & 
ye  children  born  of  fuch  perfons,  is  contrary  to  ye  laws  of  Nature,  a 
fcandal  to  profefTors  of  ye  Religion  of  Jefus,  &  a  difgrace  to  all  good 
Governments,  more  efpecially  to  fuch  who  are  ftruggling  againft  Op- 
preffion  &  in  favour  of  ye  natural  &  unalienable  Rights  of  human 
nature — 

ff  Wherefore  in  fome  meafure  to  fecure  the  bleffings  of  freedom  to 
fuch  who  mail  be  hereafter  born  within  this  State — 

"  Be  it  Enabled  by  ye  Council  &  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  in  gene 
ral  court  aflembled  &  by  ye  authority  of  ye  fame  that  all  perfons  who 
mall  be  born  within  ye  limits  of  this  ftate  from  &  after  ye  day  of 

next  whether  their  parents  be  black  or  white,  or  efteemed 
Bond  or  free,  of  whatfoever  nation,  People  or  condition,  fuch  perfons 
born  as  afores'd  mall  be  &  hereby  are  intitled  to  all  ye  freedom,  Rights, 
Liberties,  privileges  &  immunities  that  do  or  of  light  ought  to  belong 
unto  free  &  natural  born  fubjects  of  this  State,  any  ufage  or  cuftom  to 
ye  contrary  notwithftanding — 

"  And  for  ye  effectual  preventing  of  ye  unnatural  practice  of  felling 
promifcuoufly  and  transferring  a  property  in  our  fellow  creatures,  dis 
graceful  to  human  nature,  &  a  fcandal  to  profeffing  chriftians — There 
fore  Be  it  Enatted  by  ye  authority  aforefaid  that  all  bargains,  fales, 
conveyances  &  other  writings  or  contract  without  writing  whatfoever 
for  ye  conveying  or  transferring  of  any  property  in  our  fellow  creatures 
or  of  ye  labour  or  fervice  of  any  perfons  whatfoever  of  more  than 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  185 

twenty-one  years  of  age  to  a  third  perfon  other  than  of  fuch  perfon 
who  fhall  voluntarily  make  himfelf  a  party  to  fuch  Inftruments  or 
writings  or  where  he  fhall  be  fubjedted  to  fuch  fale,  or  fervice  by  vir 
tue  of  ye  order  of  fome  court  of  Record,  made  after  ye  day  of 
next  mail  be  null  &  void  to  all  intents,  conilructions  &  pur- 
pofes  whatfoever,  any  Law,  Ufage  or  cuftom  to  ye  contrary  in  any  wife 
notwithftanding."  Maj's.  Archives :  Vol.  142,58. 

On  the  nth  of  September,  1777,  a  petition  was 
read  in  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  from  the  felect- 
men  of  the  town  of  Woburn,  praying  an  abatement 
of  their  quota  of  men  for  the  Continental  Army,  for 
Slaves,  Idiots,  Infane,  Captives,  &c.,  and  thofe  under 
age.  The  petitioners  had  leave  to  withdraw  their  pe 
tition. 

A  trace  of  the  exercife  of  private  judgment  and 
one  phafe  of  public  opinion  foon  afterwards,  on  this 
fubject,  may  be  feen  in  the  following  extract  from  the 
Journal  of  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  24th  Sep 
tember,  1777 : 

"A  Petition  of  Jofeph  Prout  of  Scarborough, 
fetting  forth  that  Mr.  William  Vaughan  lately  told 
his  two  Negroes  that  by  an  Act  of  Court  all  Negroes 
were  made  free,  in  confequence  whereof  they  have 
fince  left  him,  and  one  of  them  has  hired  himfelf  to 
faid  Vaughan,  who  withholds  him  from  the  Petitioner, 
therefore  praying  relief.  Read  and  difmifTed."  p.  86. 

As  the  efforts  towards  the  formation  of  a  State 
Conftitution  gradually  ftrengthened  and  took  fhape, 
the  fubject  of  flavery  and  the  flatus  of  the  negro  came 
up  again  and  again.  There  was  a  conflict  of  opinions 
and  interefls,  and  the  newfpapers  of  the  day  bear  wit- 
nefs  to  its  progrefs.  The  friends  of  the  negro  did 


1 86  Notes  on  the  Htftory  of 

not  by  any  means  have  it  all  their  own  way.  The 
mufes  were  invoked  on  both  fides.  In  the  Independ 
ent  Chronicle  of  the  29th  Jan.,  1778,  nearly  a  column 
of  the  paper  is  occupied  with  about  one  hundred  lines 
of  verfe  ridiculing  negro  equality,  which  was  refponded 
to  by  another  production  in  verfe  in  the  paper  of  the 
1 2th  February.  This  brought  out  a  rejoinder,  alfo  in 
verfe,  in  the  following  week,  Feb.  i9th,  1778. 

The  difcuflion  was  not  confined  to  thefe  poetical 
champions.  As  early  as  the  8th  of  January,  1778, 
Doctor  Gordon  took  up  one  phafe  of  the  bufinefs 
with  an  article  in  the  Independent  Chronicle,  in  which 
he  faid : 

"  Would  it  not  be  ridiculous,  inconfiflent  and  un- 
jufl,  to  exclude  freemen  from  voting  for  reprefentatives 
and  fenators,  though  otherwife  qualified,  becaufe  their 
fkins  are  black,  tawny  or  reddifh  ?  Why  not  difquali- 
fied  for  being  long-nofed,  mort-faced,  or  higher  or 
lower  than  five  feet  nine  ?  A  black,  tawny  or  reddifh 
fkin  is  not  fo  unfavorable  an  hue  to  the  genuine  fon 
of  liberty,  as  a  tory  complection.  Has  any  other 
State  difqualified  freemen  for  the  color  of  their  fkin  ? 
I  do  not  recollect  any  ;  and  if  not,  the  difqualification 
militates  with  the  propofal  in  the  Confederation,  that 
the  free  inhabitants  of  each  State  mall,  upon  removing 
into  any  other  State,  enjoy  all  the  privileges  and  im 
munities  belonging  to  the  free  citizens  of  fuch  State." 

With  regard  to  the  proceedings  of  the  Legiflature- 
Convention  of  1777—1778,  little  is  known  ;  but  the 
draft  of  a  Conftitution  was  prepared,  which  was 
debated  at  length,  approved  by  the  Convention,  pre- 
fented  to  the  Legiflature,  and  fubmitted  to  the  people, 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  187 

by  whom  it  was  rejected.    Barry :  Hiftory  of  Mafs.,  n., 

'75- 

We  have  been  fortunate  enough  to  recover  a  frag 
ment  of  the  debates  in  the  Convention,  which  bears 
on  our  fubjed.  It  mows  that  there  was  a  continued 
conteft  in  that  body  between  thofe  who  fupported  and 
thofe  who  oppofed  negro  equality,  in  which  the  latter 
carried  the  day ;  and  alfo  that  it  was  after  debate — 
not  unconfcioufly  or  without  notice — that  a  majority 
of  the  Legiflature  of  Maflachufetts,  fpecially  inftrucl- 
ed  to  frame  the  organic  law  for  the  new  State,  delibe 
rately,  in  the  year  1778,  excluded  negroes,  Indians, 
and  mulattoes  from  the  rights  of  citizenftiip. 

From  the  Independent  Chronicle,  September  23,  1779. 
Mr.  WILLIS. 

Pleafe  to  infert  the  following  in  your  Independent  Chronicle,  and 
you  will  oblige  the  publick's  friend  and  humble  servant, 

JOHN  BACON. 
Stockbridge,  Sept.  10,  1779. 

"  Open  thy  mouth,  judge  righteoujly,  plead  the  caufe  of  the  poor 
and  needy." — KING  SOLOMON. 

The  subftance  of  a  fpeech  delivered  in  the  late  Convention,  on  a  mo 
tion  being  made  for  reconfidering  a  vote,  by  which  this  claufe, 
"except  Negroes,    Indians  and   Mulattoes,"  in  the   twenty-third 
article  of  the  report  of  the  Committee,  was  inferted. 
Mr.  PRESIDENT  : — As  I  have  from  the  beginning  of  thefe  debates 
been  oppofed  to  that  claufe,  the  erafure  of  which  has  now  been  moved 
for,  I  beg  leave  briefly  to  lay  the  reafons  of  my  oppofition  before  this 
honorable  Convention. 

In  the  firft  place,  Mr.  Prefident,  by  retaining  this  claufe  in  our 
Conftitution,  we  make  ourfelves  fingular,  or  nearly  fo.  No  Conftitu- 
tion  on  the  Continent,  one  only  excepted,  bears  the  leail  complexion 
of  this  kind.  Say  the  honorable  and  patriotick  Convention  of  Penn- 
fylvania,  in  their  Bill  of  Rights,  Art.  7  :  "  all  free  men  having  a  fufE- 


1 88  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

cient  evident  common  intereft  with,  and  attachment  to  the  community, 
have  a  right  to  cleft  officers,  or  be  elected  into  office."  The  conftitu- 
tions  in  general  which  have  been  formed  of  late  through  the  Continent, 
breathe  a  like  confiftent  and  genuine  fpirit  of  liberty.  But  be  this  as  it 
may,  Sir,  whether  we  hereby  make  ourfelves  fingular  or  not,  I  have 
other  reasons  to  offer  for  being  in  favor  of  the  motion.  By  holding  up 
this  claufe  in  our  conftitution,  we  fap  the  foundation  of  that  liberty 
which  we  are  now  defending  at  the  expenfe  of  all  that  blood  and 
treafure  which  we  fo  liberally  part  with  in  the  profecution  of  the 
prefent  war  with  Great  Britain ;  by  holding  up  this  claufe,  we  contra 
dict  the  fundamental  principle  on  which  we  engaged  in  our  prefent 
oppofition  to  that  power.  The  principle  on  which  we  engaged  in  this 
oppofition,  Sir,  I  take  to  be  this,  that  reprefentation  and  taxation  are 
reciprocal, — that  we,  not  being  reprefented  in  the  Parliament  of  Great 
Britain,  Parliament  had  no  right  to  tax  us  without  our  confent.  When 
the  Parliament  of  Great  Britain  affumed  this  power  and  plead  the 
charter  of  this  (then)  Province  to  juftify  their  claim,  we  in  our  turn, 
not  only  plead  the  fame  charter  in  oppofition  to  fuch  claim,  but  even 
contended,  that  on  fuppofition  the  charter  gave  them  this  power,  yet 
it  was  a  power  fo  inconfiftent  with'  the  eflential  natural  rights  of  men, 
that  no  contract  whatever  could,  in  fuch  cafe,  bind  us.  On  this  prin 
ciple,  Sir,  we  engaged  in  the  prefent  war,— on  this  principle  we  fup- 
pofe  ourfelves  juftified  in  refilling,  even  to  blood,  that  power  which 
would  thus  arbitrarily  exact  upon  us;  and  on  the  fame  principle,  I 
conceive,  the  perfons  excepted  in  the  claufe  now  before  the  Conven 
tion,  would  be  juftified  in  making  the  fame  oppofition  againft  us  which 
we  are  making  againft  Great  Britain  :  If  not,  Mr.  Prefident,  let  any 
gentleman  point  out  the  difference  between  the  two  cafes ;  no  efTential 
difference  has  yet  been  pointed  out  by  any  gentleman  who  has  fpoke 
to  the  queftion,  and  no  fuch  difference,  I  prefume,  does  in  fact  exift. 

But  I  am  apprised  of  an  objection  that  is  made  by  gentlemen  on 
the  oppofite  fide.  They  fay,  "  that  by  being  protected  by  our  laws 
(without  any  mare  in  the  reprefentation)  they  fecure  benefits  which  are 
fully  equivalent  to  the  tax  which  we  lay  upon  them."  This,  Sir,  is  the 
very  argument  by  which  Great  Britain  pretend  to  fupport  their  claim 
of  taxing  us ;  and  I  confefs,  Sir,  it  appears  to  me,  in  every  view,  as 
fully  to  juftify  their  pretenfions  with  refpect  to  us,  as  it  does  ours  with 
refpect  to  thofe  perfons  who  are  the  fubject  of  the  prefent  debate.  So 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  189 

that,  by  retaining  this  claufe  in  our  conftitution,  we  bring  ourfelves  into 
this  unhappy  dilemma,  that  either  in  one  cafe  or  the  other,  we  mult, 
out  of  our  own  mouth,  and  by  our  own  conduct,  be  condemned.  So 
far  as  we  can  juftify  our  conduct  in  our  prefent  oppofition  to  Great 
Britain,  fo  far  it  muft  be  condemned  as  it  relates  to  thofe  who  are  men 
tioned  in  the  article  now  before  us  and  vice  verfa.  But  this  is  not  all, 
Mr.  Prefident ;  Who  are  to  fet  a  value  on  the  privileges  which  thefe 
people  enjoy  under  our  government  ?  Do  we  allow  them  a  voice  in 
the  contract  ?  By  no  means.  We  fet  a  price  upon  our  own  commodi 
ty,  and  oblige  them  to  give  it  whether  they  will  or  not ;  and  this,  not 
as  to  the  luxuries  of  life,  not  as  to  the  necejjaries  of  life  only,  but  even 
life  itself.  And  if  we  may  take  upon  us,  without  their  confent,  to  fet 
a  value  upon  thofe  benefits  which  they  receive  from  our  laws,  and 
make  them  pay  accordingly,  we  may,  on  the  fame  principle,  fet  thefe 
benefits  at  a  higher  or  lower  price,  and  fo  tax  them  in  a  greater  or  lefs 
proportion  according  to  our  own  fovereign  pleasure.  According  to 
our  own  avowed  principles,  if  we  may  take  from  them  one  farthing  in 
this  way,  we  may  by  the  fame  rule,  take  from  them  every  farthing 
they  poflefs.  Nay  more,  we  may  fubject  them  to  perpetual  fervitude, 
as  being  no  more  than  a  juft  compenfation  for  the  benefit  they  receive 
in  having  their  lives  protected  by  our  laws ;  and  if  this  is  not  to  eftablifh 
flavery  by  a  conftitution,  the  foundations  of  which,  it  is  pretended,  are 
laid  in  the  moft  extenfive  principles  of  liberty,  I  confefs,  Sir,  I  am  ut 
terly  ignorant  of  what  the  terms  liberty  andjlavery  mean. 

But  it  is  further  urged  by  gentlemen  on  the  oppofite  fide,  "  that 
the  cafe  now  before  the  Convention  is  widely  different  from  that 
between  us  and  Great  Britain, — that  Great  Britain  aflume  a  right  to 
impofe  taxes  on  us  of  which  they  pay  no  part  themfelves, — that  the 
more  they  lay  upon  us,  the  lefs  they  have  to  pay  themfelves, — that 
hence  there  is  to  them  a  ftrong  inducement  to  bear  us  down  by  exor 
bitant  taxation ;  whereas  we,  in  taxing  thefe  people,  tax  ourfelves 
at  the  fame  time."  But  who,  Mr.  Prefident,  perceives  not  the  futility 
and  deceit  of  this  argument  ?  If  we  are  to  tax  them,  not  as  members 
of  our  community,  but  as  receiving  particular  benefits  from  our  laws, 
what  fecurity  can  they  have  that  we  mall  not  multiply  taxes  upon  them 
in  proportion  to  the  value  which  our  caprice  or  covetoufnefs  may  fet 
upon  thefe  fuppofed  benefits.  And  whether  we  tax  ourfelves  at  the 
fame  time  that  we  tax  them,  or  not,  is  wholly  immaterial :  They  are 


190  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

to  be  taxed  on  quite  a  different  footing  from  that  on  which  we  are 
taxed  ourfelves ;  yea,  as"  perfons  who  do  not  belong  to  our  community, 
and  the  more  we  lay  upon  them,  the  lefs  we  mail  certainly  have  to  pay 
ourfelves. 

But  it  is  Hill  further  urged  by  gentlemen  on  the  other  fide,  "  that 
thefe  perfons  are  foreigners^  and  therefore  not  intitled  to  a  voice  in 
legiflation." 

But  how  does  this  appear,  Mr.  Prefident  ?  What,  unlefs  it  be  their 
color,  conflitutes  them  foreigners  ?  Are  they  not  Americans  ?  Were 
they  not  (moil  of  them  at  leaft)  born  in  this  country  ?  Is  it  not  a  faft, 
that  thofe  who  are  not  natives  of  America,  were  forced  here  by  us, 
contrary,  not  only  to  their  own  wills,  but  to  every  principle  of  juftice 
and  humanity  ?  I  wifh,  Sir,  thefe  gentlemen  would  tell  us  what  they 
mean  by  foreigners.  Do  they  mean  by  it,  fuch  perfons,  whofe  an- 
ceflors  came  from  fome  other  country  ?  If  fb,  who  of  us  is  not  a 
foreigner  ?  Or  do  they  mean  to  include  under  the  denomination  of 
foreigners,  all  thofe  who  are  not  born  in  this  State,  how  long  foever 
they  may  have  lived  among  us,  whatever  property  they  may  have  ac 
quired,  whatever  connexions  they  may  have  formed,  or  however  they 
may  have  been  incorporated  with  us  by  our  prefent  laws  and  conftitu- 
tion  ?  Thefe  people,  Sir,  by  our  prefent  conftitution,  are  intitled  to  the 
fame  privileges  with  any  of  their  fellow-fubjecls ;  and  by  what  authority 
we  are  now  to  wrell  thefe  rights  and  privileges  from  them,  I  cannot 
conceive,  unlefs  by  dint  of  mere  power.  And  I  hope,  Sir,  that  right, 
as  founded  in  mere  power,  is  not  to  receive  a  fanftion  from  our  confti 
tution. 

But  there  is  one  argument  more  which  has  been  urged  by  gentle 
men  on  the  oppofite  fide,  as  being  of  great  weight  and  importance^ 
which  is  this,  "  That  by  erafing  this  claufe  out  of  the  conftitution,  we 
mail  greatly  offend  and  alarm  the  Southern  States."  Should  this  be  the 
cafe,  Sir,  it  would  be  furprifing  indeed !  But  can  it  be  fuppofed,  Mr. 
Prefident,  that  any  of  the  fifter  States  will  be  offended  with  us,  becaufe 
we  don't  fee  fit  to  do  that  which  they  themfelves  have  not  done  ?  Nay, 
more,  will  they  be  offended  or  alarmed  that  we  do  not  violate  thofe 
eflential  rights  of  human  nature  which  they  have  taken  the  moft  effectual 
care  to  eftablifh  and  fecure  ?  It  will  not  bear  a  fiippofition  ;  the  argu 
ment,  Sir,  is  moft  ridiculous  and  abfurd. 

In  fine,  Sir,  I  hope  we  mail  not  be  fo  inconfiftent  with  ourfelves, 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  191 

fo  deftitute  of  all  regard  to  common  juftice  and  the  natural  rights  of 
men,  as  to  fufFer  this  form  of  conflitution  to  go  abroad  with  this 
exceptionable  claufe  ;  I  hope  the  motion  will  obtain,  and  the  claufe  be 
reprobated  by  the  Convention.  But  mould  this  not  be  the  cafe,  mould  it 
eventually  appear  that  there  is  fo  great  a  want  of  virtue  within  thefe 
walls,  I  ftill  hope  there  will  be  found  among  the  people  at  large,  virtue 
enough  to  trample  under  foot  a  form  of  government  which  thus  faps 
the  foundation  of  civil  liberty,  and  tramples  on  the  rights  of  men. 

We  have  already  intimated  that  thefe  liberal  and 
enlightened  views  did  not  prevail.  On  the  contrary, 
the  <c  Conftitution  and  Form  of  Government  for  the 
State  of  Maflachufetts  Bay,  agreed  upon  by  the 
Convention  of  faid  State,  February  28,  1778,  to  be 
laid  before  the  feveral  towns  and  Plantations  in  faid 
State,  for  their  Approbation  or  Difapprobation,"  has 
the  following  article: 

"  V.  Every  male  inhabitant  of  any  town  in  this 
State,  being  free,  and  twenty-one  years  of  age,  except 
ing  Negroes^  Indians  and  molattoes,  mall  be  intitled  to 
vote  for  a  Reprefentative  or  Reprefentatives,  as  the 
cafe  may  be.  .  .  .  ,"  etc. 1 

This  not  only  excludes  Negroes,  Indians,  and 
Molattoes  from  the  chief  right  of  citizenfhip,  but  alfo 
recognizes  the  exiflence  of  flavery  in  the  State ;  and 
although  it  was  rejected  by  an  overwhelming  vote,  we 
have  feen  no  evidence  that  this  feature  of  the  inftru- 
ment  elicited  fuch  oppofition  as  might  be  expected  in 
a  community  already  prepared  for  negro  emancipa 
tion  and  enfranchifement.  In  the  famous  EfTex  Refult, 
the  ableil  document  on  the  fubject  now  to  be  found — 

1  The  remainder  of  the  feftion  relates  to  refidence  and  property  quali 
fications,  etc. 


192  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

an  elaborate  report,  written  by  Theophilus  Parfons, 
of  a  Committee  appointed  by  the  Ipfwich  Convention 
for  the  exprefs  purpofe  of  ftating  the  non-conformity 
of  this  Conftitution  to  the  true  principles  of  govern 
ment  applicable  to  the  territory  of  the  Maflachufetts 
Bay — the  fifth  article  is  not  referred  to ;  and  the 
exiftence  of  flavery,  although  earneftly  deprecated,  is 
clearly  recognized,  as  well  as  the  impracticability  of 
immediate  emancipation. 

"  The  opinions  and  confent  of  the  majority  muft 
be  collected  from  perfons,  delegated  by  every  freeman 
of  the  State  for  that  purpofe.  Every  freeman  who 
hath  fufficient  difcretion  mould  have  a  voice  in  the 
election  of  his  legiflators.  .  .  .  All  the  members  of 
the  State  are  qualified  to  make  the  election,  unlefs  they 
have  not  fufficient  difcretion,  or  are  fo  fituated  as  to 
have  no  wills  of  their  own.  Perfons  not  twenty-one 
years  old  are  deemed  of  the  former  clafs.  .  .  .  Wo 
men  alfo.  .  .  .  Slaves  are  of  the  latter  clafs  and  have 
no  wills.  But  are  flaves  members  of  a  free  govern 
ment  ?  We  feel  the  abfurdity,  and  would  to  God, 
the  fituation  of  America  and  the  tempers  of  its  in 
habitants  were  fuch,  that  the  flaveholder  could  not 
be  found  in  the  land."  Rejult  of  the  Convention,  etc., 
pp.  28,  29. 

Dr.  Gordon  continued  his  zealous  championship 
of  the  colored  races,  and  in  one  of  his  letters  on  the 
propofed  Conflitution  1  attacked  this  Fifth  Article  in 
a  moft  pungent  ftyle  of  oppofition.  Gordon's  rela- 

1  Letter  No.  n.,  to  the  Freemen  of  the  Maflachufetts  Bay,  dated  Rox- 
bury,  April  ad,  1778,  publifhed  in  the  Continental  Journal,  April  gth, 
1778. 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  193 

tions  with  the  Legiflature  had  been  moil  intimate,  as 
Chaplain  to  both  Houfes,  and  he  well  knew  how 
reluctantly  the  partifans  of  flavery  were  giving  ground. 
We  quote  the  paflages  referred  to : 

"  The  complexion  of  the  5th  Article  is  blacker 
than  that  of  any  African  ;  and  if  not  altered,  will  be 
an  everlafling  reproach  upon  the  prefent  inhabitants ; 
and  evidence  to  the  world,  that  they  mean  their  own 
rights  only,  and  not  thofe  of  mankind,  in  their  cry  for 
liberty.  I  remember  not,  that  any  State  have  been  fo 
inconfiftent  as  to  declare  in  their  Conftitution,  how 
ever  they  may  practice,  that  a  freeman  mall  not  have 
the  right  of  voting,  merely  becaufe  of  his  being  a 
Negro,  an  Indian,  or  a  Molatto.  I  am  forry  the 
Convention  did  not  take  the  hint  when  given  in  time, 
and  avoid  this  public  fcandal.  It  hath  been  argued, 
that  were  Negroes  admitted  to  vote,  the  Southern 
States  would  be  offended,  and  we  mould  be  foon 
crowded  with  them  from  thence.  This  would  be  to 
fuppofe  the  Southern  States  as  weak  as  the  argument. 
Will  not  the  Negroes  be  as  likely  to  crowd  into  the 
State,  if  they  may  be  free,  though  they  are  debarred 
the  right  of  voting  ?  Will  any  be  fo  hardy  as  to  fly 
in  the  face  of  all  the  declarations  through  the  Conti 
nent,  and  affert  that  the  Negroes  are  made  to  be,  and 
are  fit  for  nothing  but  flaves  ?  Let  fuch  know,  that 
in  Jamaica,  there  are  a  number  of  free  Negroes,  who, 
refenting  the  tyranny  of  their  mafters,  freed  themfelves 
from  flavery,  and  continued  in  a  ftate  of  war  for 
feveral  years,  till  at  length  King  George  the  lid.,  by 
letters  patent,  empowered  two  gentlemen  to  conclude 
a  treaty  of  peace  and  friendfhip  with  them,  which  was 
13 


194  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

done  on  the  ift  of  March,  1739,  wherein  they  had 
their  liberties  confirmed.  The  exception  of  Indians 
is  flill  more  odious,  their  anceflors  having  been  for 
merly  proprietors  of  the  country.  As  to  Molattoes 
they  mould  have  been  defined.  We  mould  have  been 
told,  whether  it  intended  the  offspring  of  a  white  and 
Negro,  or  alfo  of  a  white  and  Indian ;  and  whether 
the  immediate  offspring  alone,  or  any  of  their  remote 
defcendants,  fo  that  the  blood  of  a  white  being  inter 
mixed  with  that  of  a  Negro  or  Indian,  it  mould  be 
contaminated  to  the  latefl  pofterity,  and  cut  off  the 
male  offspring  to  the  hundredth  generation,  from  the 
right  of  voting  in  an  election. 

cc  Gentlemen,  blot  out  the  exception,  and  thereby 
wipe  off  from  the  country  in  general,  the  difgrace  that 
has  been  brought  upon  it  by  the  Convention  in  par 
ticular.  If  any  are  afraid,  that  the  Bay  inhabitants 
will,  in  confequence  of  it,  at  fome  diftant  period,  be 
come  Negroes,  Indians  or  Molattoes,  let  the  General 
Court  guard  againft  it  by  future  Acts  of  State." 

Dr.  Gordon  had  already  become  very  obnoxious 
to  the  members  of  the  Legiflature,  and  was  fummarily 
difmifled  from  his  office  of  Chaplain  to  both  Houfes, 
April  4th-6th,  1778,  in  confequence  of  his  Letter  I, 
publifhed  in  the  Independent  Chronicle,  April  2d, 
1778,  in  which  he  was  faid  to  have  "rafhly  reflected 
upon  the  General  Court,"  and  "mifreprefented  their 
conduct,"  etc. 

In  Bofton,  the  fubject  of  flavery  became  the  source 
of  angry  contention,  which  grew  into  public  diforder 
and  riots.  Thomas  Kench,  in  Col.  Craft's  Regiment 
of  Artillery,  then  on  Caftle  Ifland,  had  applied  to  the 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  195 

Legiflature  for  leave  to  raife  a  detachment  of  negroes 
for  military  fervice.  This  was  on  the  third  of  April, 
1778.  On  the  feventh  of  the  fame  month  he  addrefs- 
ed  a  fecond  letter  to  the  Council,  as  follows : 

"  The  letter  I  wrote  before  I  heard  of  the  difturb- 
ance  with  Col.  Scares,  Mr.  Spear,  and  a  number  of 
other  gentlemen,  concerning  the  freedom  of  negroes, 
in  Congrefs  Street.  It  is  a  pity  that  riots  should  be 
committed  on  the  occafion,  as  it  is  juftifiable  that  ne 
groes  mould  have  their  freedom,  and  none  amongft 
us  be  held  as  flaves,  as  freedom  and  liberty  is  the 
grand  controverfy  that  we  are  contending  for ;  and  I 
truft,  under  the  fmiles  of  Divine  Providence  we  mall 
obtain  it,  if  all  our  minds  can  but  be  united;  and 
putting  the  negroes  into  the  fervice  will  prevent  much 
uneafinefs,  and  give  more  fatisfaction  to  thofe  that  are 
offended  at  the  thoughts  of  their  fervants  being  free. 

<c  I  will  not  enlarge,  for  fear  I  mould  give  offence ; 
butfubfcribemyfelf,"  &c.  Mafs.  Arch.,  Vol.  199,  80,  84. 

The  propofed  Conftitution  failed  to  pafs  the  ordeal 
of  the  popular  judgment,  fo  far  as  an  opinion  could 
be  gathered  from  the  very  partial  returns  made  of  the 
votes.  A  hundred  and  twenty  towns  neglected  to 
exprefs  any  opinion  at  all ;  and  but  twelve  thoufand 
perfons,  out  of  the  whole  State,  went  to  the  polls  to 
anfwer  in  any  way.  Two-fixths  of  them,  however, 
voted  in  the  negative.  Adams's  Works:  iv.,  214. 
Thus  the  Conftitution  was  rejected,  negro  claufe  and 
all  maring  the  fame  fate.  We  have  no  means  of  as 
certaining  the  exact  ftate  of  parties  on  this  fubject; 
but  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  there  was  a  wide  dif 
ference  of  opinions  among  the  people. 


196  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

From  the  proceedings  of  the  town  of  Bofton,  it 
does  not  appear  that  the  citizens  of  that  place  objected 
to  the  negro  exclusion,  although  they  were  unanimous 
againft  the  constitution.  In  Cambridge  it  was  voted 
down  unanimoufly,  all  the  voters  prefent  being  Free 
men,  more  than  21  years  of  age,  and  neither  "a  NE 
GRO,  INDIAN  or  MOLATTO."  Independent  Chronicle: 
June  4,  1778. 

On  the  contrary,  the  town  of  Dartmouth  notes  the 
inconfiftency  of  excluding  the  negroes,  &c.,  and  favors 
their  equal  recognition,  but  at  the  fame  time  aflures 
the  public  that  there  is  no  Negro,  Indian  or  Molatto 
among  their  voters.  Continental  Journal,  June,  1778. 

It  is  not  by  any  means  well  afcertained  at  what 
period,  if  ever,  the  negro  was  placed  on  the  footing 
of  political  equality  with  the  white  man  in  Mafiachu- 
setts.  Public  opinion  has  been  juftly  characterized 
as  a  power  often  quite  as  ftrong  as  the  law  itfelf.  At 
once  the  great  Ruler,  Lawgiver,  and  Judge  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  race,  it  has  held  its  throne  and  feat  of 
judgment  nowhere  more  firmly  than  in  MafTachu- 
fetts.  The  flave  was  "  emancipated  by  the  force  of 
public  opinion  ;"  and  the  fame  authority,  without  the 
abfolute  declaration  and  forms  of  law,  continued  to 
exclude  the  negro  from  actual  practical  equality  of 
civil  and  political  as  well  as  focial  rights. 

A  "petition  of  feveral  poor  negroes  and  mulat- 
toes,"  who  were  inhabitants  of  the  town  of  Dart 
mouth,  dated  at  that  place  on  the  loth  of  February, 
1780,  shows  the  condition  they  were  in  at  that  time. 
They  humbly  reprefent : 

"  That  we  being  chiefly  of  the  African  extract,  and 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  197 

by  reafon  of  long  bondage  and  hard  flavery,  we  have 
been  deprived  of  enjoying  the  profits  of  our  labor  or 
the  advantage  of  inheriting  eftates  from  our  parents, 
as  our  neighbors  the  white  people  do,  having  fome  of 
us  not  long  enjoyed  our  own  freedom ;  yet  of  late, 
contrary  to  the  invariable  cuftom  and  practice  of  the 
country,  we  have  been,  and  now  are,  taxed  both  in 
our  polls  and  that  fmall  pittance  of  eftate  which, 
through  much  hard  labor  and  induftry,  we  have  got 
together  to  fuftain  ourfelves  and  families  withall.  We 
apprehend  it,  therefore,  to  be  hard  ufage,  and  will 
doubtlefs  (if  continued)  reduce  us  to  a  ftate  of  beg 
gary,  whereby  we  fhall  become  a  burthen  to  others, 
if  not  timely  prevented  by  the  interpofition  of  your 
juflice  and  power, 

"Your  petitioners  further  mow,  that  we  appre 
hend  ourfelves  to  be  aggrieved,  in  that,  while  we  are 
not  allowed  the  privilege  of  freemen  of  the  State ,  having 
no  vote  or  influence  in  the  election  of  thoje  that  tax  us, 
yet  many  of  our  color  (as  is  well  known)  have 
cheerfully  entered  the  field  of  battle  in  the  defence  of 
the  common  caufe,  and  that  (as  we  conceive)  againft 
a  fimilar  exertion  of  power  (in  regard  to  taxation), 
too  well  known  to  need  a  recital  in  this  place. 

"We  moft  humbly  request,  therefore,  that  you 
would  take  our  unhappy  cafe  into  your  ferious  con- 
(ideration,  and,  in  your  wifdom  and  power,  grant  us 
relief  from  taxation,  while  under  our  prefent  deprefled 
circumftances,"  &c. 

This  petition  was  addrefled  "to  the  Honorable 
Council  and  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  in  General 
Court  aflembled,  for  the  State  of  Maflachufetts  Bay, 


198  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

in  New  England."  The  lofs  or  imperfections  of  the 
journals  of  this  period  prevent  us  from  knowing  what, 
if  any,  action  was  had  on  this  petition,  but  a  memo 
randum  in  the  handwriting  of  the  leading  petitioner, 
on  the  copy  from  which  the  above  was  taken,  tells 
the  story : 

"  This  is  the  copy  of  the  petition  which  we  did 
deliver  unto  the  Honorable  Council  and  Houfe,  for 
relief  from  taxation  in  the  days  of  our  diftrefs.  But 
we  received  none.  JOHN  CUFFE," 

Another  copy  of  the  petition  was  found,  with  the 
date,  "January  220!,  1781,"  not  iigned,  by  which  it 
would  appear  that  they  intended  to  renew  their  appli 
cation  to  the  government  for  relief. 

The  records  of  the  town  of  Dartmouth  alfo  fhow 
that  thefe  colored  inhabitants  refifted  the  payment  of 
taxes,  and  the  22d  of  April,  1781,  they  applied  to  the 
felectmen  of  the  town,  "to  put  a  fhroke  in  their  next 
warrant  for  calling  a  town-meeting,  fo  that  it  may 
legally  be  laid  before  faid  town,  by  way  of  vote,  to 
know  the  mind  of  faid  town,  whether  all  free  negroes 
and  mulattoes  fliall  have  the  Jame  privileges  in  this 
faid  town  of  Dartmouth  as  the  white  people  have> 
refpecting  places  of  profit,  choofing  of  officers,  and 
the  like,  together  with  all  other  privileges  in  all  cafes 
that  mall  or  may  happen  or  be  brought  in  this  our 
faid  Town  of  Dartmouth."  Nell's  Colored  Patriots  of 
the  Revolution,  pp.  87—90. 

It  has  been  ftated  that  thefe  proceedings  refulted 
in  eftablifhing  the  right  of  the  colored  man  to  the 
elective  franchife  in  MafTachufetts,  and  that  a  law  was 
enacted  by  the  legiflature  granting  him  all  the  privi- 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  199 

leges  belonging  to  other  citizens.  Ibid.,  pp.  90,  77. 
But  we  can  find  no  evidence  to  corroborate  this  ftate- 
ment,  which  is  alfo  entirely  inconfiftent  with  fubfe- 
quent  legiflation. 

As  late  as  1795,  the  political  flatus  of  the  negro  in 
Maflachufetts  was  by  no  means  definitely  determined. 
Dr.  Belknap  gave,  as  the  refult  of  his  inquiries  on  the 
fubject,  the  ftatement  that  they  were  cc  equally  under 
the  protection  of  the  laws  as  other  people.  Some 
gentlemen  (fays  he)  whom  I  have  confulted,  are  of 
opinion,  that  they  cannot  elect,  nor  be  elected,  to  the 
offices  of  government  \  others  are  of  a  different  opin 
ion."  Mr.  Thomas  Pemberton  was  one  of  the  per- 
fons  referred  to  by  Dr.  Belknap,  and  in  his  letter  of 
March  12,  1795,  fays  expreflly  that  "the  qualifica 
tions  required  by  the  Maflachufetts  Conftitution  pre 
vents  the  people  of  colour  from  their  being  electors 
or  elected  to  any  public  office." 

Dr.  Belknap  continues,  "  For  my  own  part,  I  fee 
nothing  in  the  conftitution  which  difqualifies  them 
either  from  electing  or  being  elected,  if  they  have  the 
other  qualifications  required  ;  which  may  be  obtained 
by  blacks  as  well  as  by  whites.  Some  of  them  cer 
tainly  do  vote  in  the  choice  of  officers  for  the  ftate  and 
federal  governments,  and  no  perfon  has  appeared  to 
conteft  their  right.  Inftances  of  the  election  of  a  black 
to  any  publick  office  are  very  rare.  I  knew  of  but 
one,  and  he  was  a  town-clerk  in  one  of  our  country 
towns.  He  was  a  man  of  good  fenfe  and  morals,  and 
had  a  fchool  education.  If  I  remember  right,  one  of 
his  parents  was  black  and  the  other  either  a  white  or 
mulatto.  He  is  now  dead."  M.  H.  $.  Coll.,  i.,  iv.,  208. 


200  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

The  queftion  muft  have  been  regarded  as  of  little 
practical  importance,  for  the  relative  number  of  ne 
groes  was  fmall ;  and  of  thofe  all  but  a  very  infignifi- 
cant  fraction  were  excluded  by  the  property  qualifica 
tion.  Had  it  been  regarded  with  intereft  enough  to 
call  for  an  authoritative  decifion,  there  is  little  room 
for  doubt  what  it  would  have  been. 


IX. 


WE  come  now  to  the  Conflitution  of  1780,  the 
inftrument  by  which  it  is  alleged  that  flavery  was 
abolifhed  in  MafTachufetts.  In  the  illuftration  of  our 
fubject,  its  hiftory  is  very  important,  and  demands 
careful  and  accurate  criticism. 

After  the  failure  of  the  attempt  in  1778,  a  conven 
tion  of  delegates  chofen  for  the  purpofe  was  decided 
upon  to  form  a  Conftitution  of  government.  They 
were  elected  in  the  fummer  of  1779,  and  met  at  Cam 
bridge  on  the  i ft  of  September  of  that  year.  On  the 
3d  they  refolved  to  prepare  a  Declaration  of  Rights 
of  the  people  of  the  MafTachufetts  Bay,  and  alfo  to 
proceed  to  the  framing  a  new  Conftitution  of  Govern 
ment.  On  the  next  day,  Sept.  4th,  a  Committee  of 
thirty  perfons  was  chofen  to  prepare  a  Declaration  of 
Rights  and  the  form  of  a  Conftitution.  On  the  6th 
September,  the  Convention  adjourned  until  the  28th 
October,  for  the  purpofe  of  giving  the  Committee 
time  to  prepare  a  report.  Immediately  upon  the 
adjournment,  the  General  Committee  met  in  Bofton, 
and  delegated  the  duty  of  preparing  a  draught  of  a 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  201 

Conftitution  to  a  fub-committee  of  three  members — 
James  Bowdoin,  Samuel  Adams,  and  John  Adams. 
By  this  fub-committee  the  tafk  was  committed  to 
John  Adams,  who  performed  it.  The  preparation 
of  a  Declaration  of  Rights  was  intrufted  by  the  Gen 
eral  Committee  to  Mr.  Adams  alone.  His  own 
ftatement  with  regard  to  it  is,  "  The  Declaration  of 
Rights  was  drawn  by  John  Adams ;  but  the  article 
refpecting  religion,  was  referred  to  fome  of  the  clergy 
or  older  and  graver  perfons  than  myfelf,  who  would 
be  more  likely  to  hit  the  tafte  of  the  public/'  MS. 
Letter  of  John  Adams  to  William  D.  Williamjon,  25 
February,  1812,  quoted  in  WiUiamfoifs  Maine,  n, 
483,  note.  Adams's  Works :  iv.,  215-16. 

The  firft  Article  of  the  Declaration  of  Rights,  as 
reported  to  the  Convention,  was  as  follows  : 

"ART.  i.  All  men  are  born  equally  free  and  in 
dependent,  and  have  certain  natural,  eflential  and  un- 
alienable  rights :  among  which  may  be  reckoned  the 
right  of  enjoying  and  defending  their  lives  and  liber 
ties  ;  that  of  acquiring,  porTeffing,  and  protecting  their 
property;  in  fine;  that  of  feeking  and  obtaining  their 
fafety  and  happinefs."  Report,  p.  7. 

This  article,  as  reported,  met  with  no  oppofition, 
elicited  little  or  no  discuflion,  and  was  accepted  with 
but  flight  and  unimportant  verbal  amendments. 
Journal,  p.  37.  It  ftands  thus  in  the  Conftitution  of 
Maflachufetts : 

"ART.  i.  All  men  are  born  free  and  equal,  and 
have  certain  natural,  eflential,  and  unalienable  rights  ; 
among  which  may  be  reckoned  the  right  of  enjoying, 
and  defending  their  lives  and  liberties  ;  that  of  ac- 


2O2  Notes  on  the  Hi/lory  of 

quiring,  poflefling,  and  protecting  property ;  in  fine, 
that  of  feeking  and  obtaining  their  fafety  and  happi- 
nefs."  Conftitution,  p.  7. 

Its  language  is  nearly  the  fame  with  that  of  the 
firft  article  of  the  Bill  of  Rights  of  Virginia,  written 
by  George  Mafon,  and  adopted  by  her  Convention 
on  the  1 2th  of  June,  1776,  when  "Virginia  pro 
claimed  the  Rights  of  Man."  Bancroft,  vin.,  381. 
The  fame  language,  common  in  thofe  days,  became 
more  familiar  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  on 
the  4th  of  July,  1776,  and  in  the  Pennfylvania  De 
claration  of  Rights,  July  1 5th — September  2 8th,  1776  ; 
and  this  affirmation  of  natural  and  even  unalienable 
rights  had  long  ceafed  to  be  a  novelty  before  MafTa- 
chufetts  repeated  it  in  her  Convention  of  1779-80. 
The  Conftitution  was  fubmitted  to  the  people  in 
March,  adopted  by  a  popular  vote  in  June,  and  the 
new  government  went  into  operation  on  the  25th  of 
October,  1780. 

It  is  a  remarkable  ftatement  for  a  Maflachufetts 
writer  to  make,  but  it  is  undoubtedly  true,  that  cc  much 
intereft  has  been  felt  of  late  years  to  know  when,  and 
under  what  circumftances,  ilavery  ceafed  to  exift  in 
Maffachufetts."  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  iv.,  iv.,  333.  The 
fad  that  Daniel  Webfler  had  not  been  able  a  few 
years  before  his  death  to  determine  this  queftion  fatis- 
factorily,  is  pretty  good  evidence  that  it  was  doubtful; 
and  will  go  far  to  juftify  a  good  degree  of  caution  in 
its  decifion.  In  1836,  Chief- Juftice  Shaw  made  an 
interefting  ftatement  on  this  point: 

"  How  or  by  what  act  particularly,  flavery  was 
abolifhed  in  Maflachufetts,  whether  by  the  adoption 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  203 

of  the  opinion  in  Somerfet's  cafe,  as  a  declaration  and 
modification  of  the  common  law,  or  by  the  Declaration 
of  Independence,  or  by  the  Conftitution  of  1780,  it 
is  not  now  very  eafy  to  determine,  and  it  is  rather  a 
matter  of  curiofity  than  utility  ;  it  being  agreed  on  all 
hands,  that  if  not  abolifhed  before,  it  was  fo  by  the 
Declaration  of  Rights."  Commonwealth  v.  Aves,  18 
Pickering,  209. 

Few  perfons  can  now  be  found  hardy  enough  to 
date  the  abolition  of  flavery  in  Maffachufetts  from 
Lord  Mansfield's  decifion  in  the  Somerfet  cafe,  or 
the  Declaration  of  Independence.  But  the  received 
opinion  in  Maflachufetts  is,  that  the  firft  article  of 
the  Declaration  of  Rights  was  not  fimply  the  decla 
ration  of  an  abftract  principle  or  dogma,  which  might 
be  wrought  out  into  a  practical  fyftem  by  fubfequent 
legiflation,  but  was  intended  to  have  the  aftive  force 
and  conclufive  authority  of  law  ;  to  divefl  the  title  of 
the  matter,  to  break  the  bonds  of  the  flave,  to  annul 
the  condition  of  fervitude,  and  to  emancipate  and  fet 
free  by  its  own  force  and  efficacy,  without  awaiting 
the  enforcement  of  its  principles  by  judicial  decifion. 
Compare  7  Gray,  478.  5  Leigh,  623. 

We  have  made  diligent  inquiry,  fearch,  and  ex 
amination,  without  difcovering  the  flighteft  trace  of 
pofitive  contemporary  evidence  to  fhow  that  this 
opinion  is  well  founded.  The  family  traditions  which 
have  defignated  the  elder  John  Lowell  as  the  author 
of  the  Declaration,  and  afligned  the  intention  to 
abolifh  flavery  as  the  exprefs  motive  for  its  origin, 
will  not  ftand  the  teft  of  hiflorical  criticifm.  The 
truth  is,  that  the  bold  judicial  conftruction  by  which 


204  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

it  was  afterwards  made  the  instrument  of  virtual  aboli 
tion,  was  only  gradually  reached  and  fuftained  by  public 
opinion — the  Court  having  advanced  many  fteps  fur 
ther  than  was  intended  by  the  Convention  or  under- 
ftood  by  the  people,  in  their  decifion  on  this  fubjedL 
If  it  were  poffible  that  fuch  a  purpofe  could  have 
been  avowed  in  the  Convention  and  wrought  into  their 
work,  without  oppofition,  it  certainly  could  not  have 
pafTed  abfolutely  without  notice.  Such  a  converfion 
would  be  too  fudden  to  be  genuine ;  and  if  we  follow 
the  facts  in  their  natural  chronological  order,  the 
actual  refult  will  fall  into  its  due  place  and  petition 
without  force  or  violation  of  the  truth  of  hiftory. 

Now  there  is  no  evidence  of  oppofition,  either  in 
the  Convention  or  out  of  it.  Not  even  a  notice  of 
this  important  revolution,  in  the  newfpapers  of  the 
day  or  elfewhere,  has  rewarded  our  earneft  and  careful 
fearch.  John  Adams,  the  author  of  the  Bill  of  Rights, 
was  not  in  favor  of  immediate  emancipation  (see  ante, 
p.  no).  The  moft  ftrenuous  anti-flavery  men  were 
unconfcious  of  any  fuch  intention  or  refult  for  a  long 
time  afterward  ;  and  the  newfpapers  continued  to  ad- 
vertife  the  fales  of  negroes  as  before.  There  is  no 
thing  to  mow  that  fo  great  a  change  was  contemplated 
or  realized,  and  thofe  who  maintain  it  would  have  us 
believe  that  the  people  of  MafTachufetts,  like  the 
Romans  on  another  memorable  occafion,  fuddenly 
became  quite  another  people.1 

The  addrefs  of  the  Convention,  on  fubmitting  the 
refult  of  their  labors  to  their  conftituents,  makes  no 

1  "  Ad  primum  nuntium  cladis  Pompeianae  populus  Romanus  repente 
fa&us  eft  alius." 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  205 

allufion  whatever  to  this  fubject.  No  one  can  read  it 
— fetting  forth  as  it  does  the  principal  features  of  the 
new  plan  of  government,  the  grounds  and  reafons 
upon  which  they  had  formed  it,  with  their  explana- 
.  tions  of  the  principal  parts  of  the  fyftem — and  retain 
the  belief  that  they  had  confcioufly,  deliberately,  and 
intentionally  adopted  the  firft  claufe  in  the  Declara 
tion  of  Rights  for  the  exprefs  purpofe  of  aboliming 
flavery  in  MafTachufetts.  The  fame  Bill  of  Rights 
provided  that  cc  no  part  of  the  property  of  any  indi 
vidual,  can,  with  juftice,  be  taken  from  him,  or  applied 
to  public  ufes,  without  his  own  confent,  or  that  of  the 
reprefentative  body  of  the  people,"  and,  in  another 
claufe,  that  cc  no  fubject  mall  be  ...  deprived  of  his 
property  but  by  the  judgment  of  his  peers,  or  the  law 
of  the  land."  Conftitution,  p.  10,  n.  Did  the  members 
of  that  Convention  intend  deliberately  to  diveft  the 
recognized  title  to  property  of  their  fellow-citizens, 
amounting  to  not  lefs  than  half  a  million  of  dollars,^' 
without  a  word  of  explanation  of  the  high  grounds  of 
juftice  or  public  policy  on  which  they  bafed  their 
action  ?  If  any  further  evidence  is  needed  in  this  con 
nection,  it  may  be  found  in  the  fubfequent  fuits,  with 
the  entire  proceedings  and  arguments  of  counfel,  by 
which  the  refult  of  virtual  abolition  was  finally  fecured ; 
as  well  as  in  the  legiflative  proceedings  which  followed 
—all  utterly  inconfiftent  with  the  theory  of  a  direct 
and  intentional  abolition  by  the  Convention  and 
People.  Compare  Wafliburn^  in  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  iv., 

iv->  333—346. 

We  have  faid  that  earneft  anti-flavery  men  at  that 
time  were  not  aware  of  the  alleged  intention  of  the 


206  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Convention  to  abolifli  flavery  by  the  declaration  in 
the  Bill  of  Rights.  We  have  previoufly  referred  to 
the  earneft  efforts  of  Deacon  Colman,  of  Newbury, 
againfl  flavery  as  early  as  1774-' 7 5.  A  controverfy 
between  him  and  his  confervative  minifter,  as  fhown 
in  the  Church  Records  from  1780  to  1785,  demon- 
ftrates  this  fact.  The  minifler  was  the  father  of 
Theophilus  Parfons,  afterwards  fo  well  known  in  the 
State  of  Maffachufetts  as  Chief  Juftice — the  "  Giant 
of  the  Law."  In  the  Deacon's  Teftimony  and  De 
claration,  he  fays : 

cc  The  flaves  in  this  State  have  petitioned  for 
Liberty  and  Freedom  from  Bondage,  fince  our  Trou 
bles  began,  in  the  moft  importunate  and  humble  man 
ner  ;  yet  they  art  not  Jet  free  in  a  general  way.  .  .  . 
Magiftrates,  Minifters  and  common  people  have  had 

a  hand  in  this  Iniquitous  Trade Should 

you  plead,  Sir,  the  Law  of  the  Land,  or  the  practice 
of  the  people,  as  an  excufe  in  your  favour ;  I  anfwer, 
that  neither  the  law  of  the  land,  nor  the  commonnefs 
of  the  people's  practice  in  this  affair,  alters  the  nature 
of  the  Crime  at  all :  for  that  which  is  Wrong  in  its 
own  nature,  can  never  be  made  right  by  any  law  or 
practice  of  men."  Coffin  s  Newbury  :  342-50. 

This  was  written  November  7th,  1780,  after  the 
eflabHfhment  of  the  new  government,  and  months 
after  the  Convention  had  completed  their  work  and 
fubmitted  it  to  the  people. 

The  records  of  the  church  at  Byfield  contain  a 
long  account  of  the  controverfy  between  Mr.  Parfons 
and  his  zealous  anti-flavery  deacon — neither  of  whom 
appears  to  have  been  aware  that  flavery,  which  was 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  207 

the  fubject  of  their  difpute,  had  been  abolifhed,  either 
"virtually"  or  otherwife. 

As  late  as  the  jd  of  November,  1783,  the  deacon, 
who  had  been  fuf pended  from  communion  on  account  of  the 
violence  of  his  zeal  againft  the  inftitution,  addrefled  the 
brethren  by  a  communication,  in  which  he  declared 
that  they  had  mut  him  out  of  their  communion  cc  for 
bearing  Teftimony  againft  the  deteftable  practice  of 
Slave  keeping,  and  making  merchandife  of  human 
people."  He  adds,  "you  can't  but  be  fenfible  the 
practice  of  Slave  keeping  is  Reprobated,  and  Abhorr'd 
by  the  moft  Godly  people  through  this  State,"  etc. 
All  seem  to  be  utterly  ignorant  of  the  abolition  inten 
tion  of  the  firft  claufe  in  the  Declaration  of  Rights. 
See  Coffin  s  New  bury  :  pp.  342  et  seqq. 

Let  us  turn  again  to  the  newfpapers.  Have  the 
advertifements,  which  provoked  the  indignation  of 
Doctor  Gordon  in  1776,  difappeared  before  the  new 
Conftitution  and  the  firft  article  of  the  Bill  of  Rights  ? 
Let  the  following  felections  anfwer  the  query !  They 
are  from  papers  publifhed  during  the  continuance  of 
the  Convention,  and  the  year  following,  until  fix 
months  after  the  new  government  went  into  operation. 

From  the  Continental  Journal,  November  25,  1779. 
"  To  be  SOLD  A  likely  NEGRO  GIRL,  16  years 
of  Age,  for  no  fault,  but  want  of  employ." 

From  the  fame,  December  i6th,  1779. 

"  To  be  SOLD,  A  Strong  likely  NEGRO  GIRL," 
&c. 
From  the  Independent  Chronicle,  March  9th,  1780. 

"  To  be  SOLD,  for  want  of  employment,  an 
exceeding  likely  NEGRO  GIRL,  aged  nxteen." 


208  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

From  the  fame,  March  3oth  and  April  6th,  1780. 

"  To  be  SOLD,  very  Cheap,  for  no  other 
Reafon  than  for  want  of  Employ,  an  exceeding 
Active  NEGRO  BOY,  aged  fifteen.  Alfo,  a  likely 
NEGRO  GIRL,  aged  feventeen." 

From  the  Continental  Journal,  Auguft  17,  1780. 

"  To  be  SOLD,  a  likely  NEGRO  BOY." 
From  the  fame,  Auguft  24th  and  September  yth. 

"  To  be  SOLD  or  LETT,  for  a  term  of  years, 
a  ftrong,  hearty,  likely  NEGRO  GIRL." 

From  the  fame,  Oft.  i9th  and  26th,  and  Nov.  2d. 

"  To  be  SOLD,  a  likely  NEGRO  BOY,  about 
eighteen  years  of  Age,  fit  for  to  ferve  a  Gentleman, 
to  tend  horfes  or  to  work  in  the  Country." 

From  the  fame,  Oftober  26th,  1780. 

"  To  be  SOLD,  a  likely  NEGRO  BOY,  about  13 
years  old,  well  calculated  to  wait  on  a  Gentleman. 
Inquire  of  the  Printer." 

"  To  be  SOLD,  a  likely  young  Cow  and  CALF. 
Inquire  of  the  Printer." 

Independent  Chronicle,  Dec.  i4th,  21  ft,  28th,  1780. 

"  A  NEGRO  CHILD,  foon  expefted,  of  a  good 
breed,  may  be  owned  by  any  Perfon  inclining  to 
take  it,  and  Money  with  it." 

Continental  Journal,  Dec.  21, 1780,  and  Jan.  4,  1781. 
"  To  be  SOLD,  a  hearty,  ftrong  NEGRO  WENCH, 
about  29  years  of  age,  fit  for  town  or  country." 

The  terms  of  the  following  announcement  indi 
cate  the  fact  that  "  notions  of  Freedom  "  were  begin 
ning  to  find  their  way  into  other  heads  befides  thofe 
of  matters  and  miftrefles. 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  209 

From  the  Continental  Journal,  March  i,  1781. 

"  To  be  SOLD,  an  extraordinary  likely  NE 
GRO  WENCH,  1 7  years  old,  fhe  can  be  warranted 
to  be  ftrong,  healthy  and  good-natured,  has  no 
notion  of  Freedom,  has  been  always  ufed  to  a 
Farmer's  Kitchen  and  dairy,  and  is  not  known  to 
have  any  failing,  but  being  with  Child,  which  is 
the  only  caufe  of  her  being  fold."  * 

This  advertifement,  which  was  repeated  for  two 
weeks  after  in  the  papers  of  the  8th  and  I5th  March, 
muft  clofe  our  quotations  of  this  fort.  If  it  was  not 
the  laft  published  in  Maflachufetts,  it  ought  to  have 
been  !  It  brings  us  in  point  of  time  to  the  period  in 
which  fuits  growing  out  of  the  relations  of  matter  and 
flave  were  brought  in  the  courts  of  law,  which  ulti 
mately  refulted  in  extending  the  Declaration  in  the 
Bill  of  Rights  to  enflaved  Indians  and  Negroes — 
preaching  deliverance  to  the  captives,  and  fetting  at 
liberty  them  that  were  bruifed — the  virtual  abolition 
of  flavery. 

No  contemporaneous  report  appears  to  be  extant, 
of  the  decifions  by  which  the  general  queftion  of  the 
legality  of  flavery  in  Maflachufetts  was  determined. 
Chief-Juftice  Parfons,  in  1806,  in  the  cafe  fo  fre 
quently  quoted  before,  ftated  that,  cc  in  the  firfl  action 
involving  the  right  of  the  matter,  which  came  before 

1  This  reminds  us  of  the  period  in  Britifh  hiftory  when  Ireland  was  the 
greateft  mart  for  Englifh  flaves.  In  thofe  days,  when  any  one  had  more 
children  or  fervants  than  he  could  keep,  he  took  them  to  the  ready  market 
of  Briftol,  and  there  found  Irifh  merchants,  ready  to  purchafe.  Malmes- 
bury  affirms,  that  it  was  no  uncommon  thing  to  behold  young  girls,  ex- 
pofed  to  fale  there,  in  a  ftate  of  pregnancy,  which  raifed  their  value 
Bridge's  Jamaica:  n.,  Notes,  455-6. 
H 


2io  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

the  Supreme  Judicial  Court  after  the  eftablifhment  of 
the  Conftitution,  the  judges  declared  that,  by  virtue 
of  the  firft  article  of  the  Declaration  of  Rights,  flavery 
in  this  State  was  no  more."  iv.  Mafs.  Reports,  128. 
The  report  does  not  ftate  -what  cafe  was  here  referred 
to,  and  there  has  been  a  confiderable  difference  of 
opinion  among  thofe  who  have  referred  to  the  fubjecl. 
The  accounts  are  various  and  inconfiftent,  agreeing 
only  in  one  refpect,  that  a  determination  gradually 
grew  up  to  confider  Jlavery  as  abolifhed,  notwithstanding 
the  failure  of  every  attempt  to  deflroy  it  by  legifla- 
tion. 

The  cafe  of  Elizabeth  Freeman,  better  known  as 
cc  Mum  Bet,"  has  been  ftated  by  fome  as  the  turning- 
point  of  legal  decifion  ;  in  which  Judge  Theodore 
Sedgwick  defended  the  flave,  who  was  pronounced 
free.  The  biographer  of  Mr.  Sedgwick  in  the  New 
American  Cyclopaedia  fays :  <c  This,  it  is  believed, 
was  the  firft  fruit  of  the  declaration  in  the  Maffachu- 
fetts  Bill  of  Rights  that  c  all  men  are  born  free  and 
equal,'  and  led  to  the  end  of  flavery  in  MafTachu- 
fetts."1 

The  Duke  de  la  Rochefoucault  Liancourt  gives 
an  account  of  the  termination  of  flavery  in  MafFachu- 
fetts,  which  is  the  more  interefting  that  it  may  have 
been  derived  from  Mr.  Sedgwick  himfelf,  with  whom 
he  was  acquainted  at  Philadelphia,  and  whofe  hofpi- 
tality  he  enjoyed  in  MafTachufetts.  He  fays  :  "In 
1781,  fome  negroes,  prompted  by  private  fuggeftion., 

1  A  writer  in  the  Edinburgh  Review,  for  January,  1864,  reprefents 
this  cafe  as  having  occurred  in  1772,  and  the  refult  of  the  Maflachufetts 
Conftitution  of  1780 ! 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  2 1 1 

maintained  that  they  were  not  flaves  :  they  found  ad 
vocates,  among  whom  was  Mr.  Sedgwick,  now  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  ;  and  the  caufe 
was  carried  before  the  Supreme  Court.  Their  counfel 
pleaded,  i°.  That  no  antecedent  law  had  eftabliihed 
flavery,  and  that  the  laws  which  feemed  to  fuppofe  it 
were  the  offspring  of  error  in  the  legislators,  who  had 
no  authority  to  enact  them  : — 2°.  That  fuch  laws, 
even  if  they  had  exifted,  were  annulled  by  the  new 
Conftitution.  They  gained  the  caufe  under  both 
afpects  :  and  the  folution  of  this  firft  queftion  that 
was  brought  forward  fet  the  negroes  entirely  at  liber 
ty,  and  at  the  fame  time  precluded  their  pretended 
owners  from  all  claim  to  indemnification,  Since  they 
were  proved  to  have  poSTeSTed  and  held  them  in  flavery 
without  any  right.  As  there  were  only  a  few  flaves  in 
MaSTachufetts_,  the  decifion  paSTed  without  opposition, 
and  banifhed  all  further  idea  of  flavery."  Travels, 
etc.,  ii.,  166,  212-13. 

John  Quincy  Adams,  in  reply  to  a  queftion  put 
by  John  C.  Spencer,  ftated  that  "a  note  had  been 
given  for  the  price  of  a  flave  in  1787.  This  note  was 
fued,  and  the  Court  ruled  that  the  maker  had  received 
no  consideration,  as  man  could  not  be  fold.  From 
that  time  forward,  flavery  died  in  the  Old  Bay  State." 
Nell's  Colored  Patriots,  59. 

There  is  now,  however,  little  room  for  doubt  that 
the  leading  cafes  were  thofe  concerning  a  flave  named 
Quork  Walker,  belonging  to  Nathaniel  Jennifon,  a 
farmer  of  the  town  of  Barre,  in  Worcefter  County. 
The  flave  deferted  his  mafter,  and  was  received  and 
employed  as  a  fervant  by  John  Caldwell,  a  neighbor, 


212  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

alfo  a  farmer.1  The  flave  had  been  beaten  and  im- 
prifoned,  and  otherwife  maltreated  by  his  mafter, 
whether  before  or  after  his  defertion,  or  both,  does  not 
appear.  Out  of  thefe  principal  facts  grew  the  feries 
of  addons  in  the  Courts  which  we  are  now  briefly  to 
iketch.  Two  of  them  were  commenced  in  the  Inferior 
Court  of  Common  Pleas  for  the  County  of  Worcefter, 
at  the  June  Term  in  1781.  They  were  entitled, 
Nathaniel  Jennijon  vs.  John  and  Seth  Caldwelly  and 
ghiork  Walker  vs.  Nathaniel  Jennijon. 

The  firft  was  a  fuit  for  damages  for  enticing  away 
the  flave  from  his  mafter,  etc.,  which  refulted  in  a 
verdict  againft  the  friends  of  the  flave,  and  an  aflefs- 
ment  of  damages  at  twenty-five  pounds  (257.)  in  law 
ful  gold  or  ftlver,  or  bills  of  public  credit  equivalent 
thereto,  and  cofts  of  fuit  at 2  in  like  money  ? 

in  favor  of  the  mailer.  From  this  judgment  the 
friends  of  the  flave  appealed. 

The  fecond  was  a  fuit  for  damages  for  aflault 
and  beating,  etc.,  which  refulted  in  a  verdict  againft 
the  mafter.  The  jury  found  that  the  faid  Quork  was 
a  freeman,  and  not  the  proper  negro  flave  of  the 
defendant,  and  aflefled  damages  for  the  plaintiff  in  the 
fum  of  fifty  pounds  (5O/.)  in  lawful  gold  or  filver, 
or  bills  of  public  credit  equivalent  thereto.  The  cofts 
were  taxed  at  6/.  iu.  jd,  like  money,  From  this 
judgment  the  mafter  appealed. 

Both  appeals  came  on  at  the  next  Term  of  the  Su- 

1  Jennifon's  wife  was  a  Caldwell,  and  he  acquired  pofleffion  of  this  flave, 
in  right  of  his  wife,  who  owned  him  before  marriage.     It  may  be  that  this 
controverfy  originated  in  fome  family  quarrel. 

2  The  amount  of  cofts  is  not  itated  in  the  record. 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  213 

perior  Court,  held  at  Worcefter  on  the  third  Tuefday 
(i8th)  of  September,  1781,  before  Judges  Sargent,  Se- 
wall,  and  Sullivan. 

In  the  firft  cafe,  Nathaniel  Jennifon,  Apf1.,  vs. 
£)uork  Walker,  the  recorded  refult  was — "And  now 
the  Appellant  being  called  comes  into  Court,  but  does 
not  produce  and  give  into  Court  attefted  copies  of  the 
writ,  Judgment,  or  of  the  Evidences  filed  in  the  In 
ferior  Court,  as  the  law  directs,  wherefore  it  is  order 
ed  that  his  default  be  recorded."  Docket  September 
jTVra,  1781,  in  Worcefter.  Records,  iy8i,foL  79.  In 
his  fubfequent  attempts  to  procure  a  re-entry  of  this 
caufe,  Jennifon  grounded  his  petition  to  the  Legifla- 
ture  on  the  allegation  that  he  had  "  confided  in  his 
Council  to  produce  the  papers  from  the  Court  of 
Common  Pleas,  which  papers  the  faid  Council  failed 
to  produce^  by  means  whereof  he  became  defaulted, 
and  judgment  was  rendered  againft  him."  Majs. 
Refolves,  1782,^.  182. 

Quork  Walker 9  Comp*.,  vs.  Nathaniel  Jennifon ,  ac 
cordingly  obtained  an  affirmation  of  the  judgment. 
As  recorded  in  the  Superior  Court,  it  is  a  "  Judgment 
for  5o/.  Gold  or  Silver,  or  Bills  of  public  Credit  of 
the  new  Emiffion  equivalent  i  7~8th  for  one  Silver 
Dollar.  Damage  and  cofts  taxed  at  yl.  los.  yd.  Exon. 
iflued  Feb.  6th,  1782."  The  Legiflature  granted  a 
ftay  of  execution  by  their  refolve  of  March  5th,  1782. 
Rejolvesy  p.  182.  The  legiflative  proceedings  on  this 
fubjecl  will  be  noticed  hereafter. 

In  the  appeal  of  the  fecond  cafe,  John  Caldwell  et 
aL  Afpis.  vs.  Nathaniel  Jennifon,  the  Jury  found  "  the 
Appellants  not  guilty  in  manner  and  form  as  the 


214  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Appellee  in  his  Declaration  has  alleged ;"  and  they 
accordingly  had  Judgment  for  Cofts.  Records,  1781, 
fol  79,  80. 

The  array  of  counfel  in  this  cafe  was  diftinguifhed, 
being,  for  the  Appellants,  Caleb  Strong  and  Levi 
Lincoln  ;  and  for  the  Appellee,  Simeon  Strong,  John 
Sprague,  and  William  Stearns.  Mr.  Wamburn,  in 
his  paper  on  cc  the  Extinction  of  Slavery  in  Mafla- 
chufetts,"  gives  an  interefting  account  of  thefe  fuits, 
and  prints  (C  the  Jubftance"  of  Mr.  Lincoln's  brief, 
which  is  fo  important  as  to  provoke  our  flncere  regret 
that  he  did  not  print  it  entire  and  without  modifica 
tion.  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  iv.,  iv.,  340-44. 

The  refult  of  the  civil  actions  encouraged  the 
friends  of  the  flave  to  proceed  ftill  further ;  and  an 
indictment  was  found  at  the  fame  Term  of  the  Court 
(September,  1781)  againft  the  mailer  "  for  aflault  and 
battery,  and  falfe  imprifonment."  It  was  not  tried 
until  nearly  two  years  later,  April  Term,  1783,  when 
the  defendant  was  found  guilty  and  fentenced  to  be 
fined  40^.5  pay  cofts  of  profecution,  and  ftand  com 
mitted  till  fentence  be  performed.  Records  y  1783, 
fol.  85. 

Dr.  Belknap  wrote  and  printed,  in  the  year  1795, 
a  notice  of  this  trial,  which  we  copy. 

"  In  1781,  at  the  Court  in  Worcefter  County,  an 
indictment  was  found  againft  a  white  man  for  affault- 
ing,  beating,  and  imprifoning  a  black.  He  was  tried 
at  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court  in  1783.  His  defence 
was,  that  the  black  was  his  flave,  and  that  the  beating, 
etc.,  was  the  neceflary  reftraint  and  correction  of  the 
mafter.  This  was  anfwered  by  'citing  the  aforefaid 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  215 

claufe  in  the  declaration  of  rights.  The  judges  and 
jury  were  of  opinion  that  he  had  no  right  to  imprifon 
or  beat  the  negro.  He  was  found  guilty  and  fined 
40  fliillings.  This  decifion  was  a  mortal  wound  to 
flavery  in  MafTachufetts."  M.  H.  S.  Cot!.,  i.,  iv.,  203. 

When  owners  of  flaves  found  that  under  the  new 
regime  they  were  to  be  held  liable  in  damages  for 
correction  of  their  flaves,  they  were  not  flow  to  fee  the 
neceflary  confequences,  and  at  once  appealed  to  the 
Legiflature,  if  they  approved  the  judgment  of  the 
Court,  to  releafe  them  from  the  ftatute  obligations 
growing  out  of  their  relations  under  the  law  of  flavery 
in  MafTachufetts.  Nor  did  their  anxiety  diminifli 
when  fine  and  imprifonment  for  criminal  breach  of  the 
peace  were  added  to  civil  damages  for  the  fame  offence. 
Had  the  members  of  the  Convention  entertained  the 
opinions  which  have  fince  been  afcribed  to  them,  there 
would  have  been  no  room  left  for  doubtful  conftruc- 
tion  of  general  principles,  for  all  the  laws  which  fus- 
tained  flavery  would  have  been  exprefsly  repealed,  by 
the  very  firfl  legiflatures  under  the  Constitution,  in 
which  many  of  the  fame  men  were  prefent.  But  the 
Legiflature  confidered,  hefitated,  and  did  nothing. 
Their  proceedings  would  feem  to  have  been  governed 
by  caprice,  if  we  did  not  recognize  the  difficulties  under 
which  they  labored,  and  the  various  and  conflicting 
elements  which  controlled  them. 

The  firfl:  movement  in  the  Legiflature  was  made 
at  about  the  fame  time  the  fuits  were  begun  at  Wor- 
cefter.  In  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  on  the  9th 
of  June,  1781,  it  was  <c  Ordered,  that  Mr.  Lowell, 
Col.  Afliley,  and  Mr.  Robbins  be  a  Committee  with 


216  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

fuch  as  the  honorable  Senate  fhall  join,  to  confider  a 
Remonftrance  of  a  number  of  perfons  owning  negro 
Jervants,  and  to  report  what  may  be  proper  to  be 
done  thereon."  Mr.  Lowell  promptly  declined  to 
ferve  on  this  committee,  for  the  next  entry  is,  "Mr. 
Lowell  is  excufed,  and  Dr.  Dunfmore  is  put  on  in  his 
room."  Journal,  Vol.  n.,  p.  50.  The  order  was  fent 
up  for  concurrence,  and  we  find  on  the  fame  day,  in 
the  Senate,  a  concurrence  in  the  appointment  of 
"Doct.  Denfmore  in  the  room  of  Mr.  Lowell  refigned, 
excufed  by  the  Houfe."  Journal,  u.,  24.  On  the 
1 2th  of  June,  the  Senate  refufed  to  concur  in  the 
"  Order  of  the  Houfe  on  the  Remonftrance  and  peti 
tion  of  Nathan  Jennifon  and  others  owning  Negro 
Servants"  Ibid.,  28. 

We  have  been  unable  to  find  this  memorial,  in 
which  other  flaveholders  befides  Jennifon  joined,  ap 
parently  with  a  remonftrance  againft  the  very  firft 
fteps  in  thofe  proceedings  whofe  refults  they  had  no 
difficulty  in  foretelling.  In  all  the  fubfequent  applica 
tions  for  legiflative  relief,  Jennifon  appears  alone. 

In  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  on  the  28th  of 
January,  1782,  a  petition  was  read  from  Nathaniel 
Jennifon,  praying  for  leave  to  re-enter  an  appeal  of 
an  action  againft  Quock  Walker,  which  had  been  de 
faulted  through  the  neglect  of  his  counsel,  at  the  Su 
preme  Judicial  Court  next  to  be  holden  at  Worcefter. 
It  was  referred  to  Mr.  Metcalf,  Mr.  Smead,  and  Mr. 
Chamberlain,  who  reported  the  fame  day  a  refolve 
granting  his  prayer,  which  was  read  and  accepted,  and 
fent  up  for  concurrence.  Journal,  Vol.  u.,  487,  492. 
The  Senate,  on  the  I4th  of  February,  refufed  to 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  217 

concur,  Journal,  Vol.  n.,  263,  but  on  the  5th  of 
March  patted  a  refolve  directing,  on  the  petition  of 
Jennifon,  that  the  petitioner  ferve  the  adverfe  party 
with  an  attefted  copy  of  the  Petition,  and  to  fhow 
caufe.  This  refolve  was  concurred  in  by  the  Houfe. 
Ibid.,  300.  It  is  printed  in  the  book  of  refolves, 
March,  1782,^.  182. 

On  the  1 8th  of  April,  1782,  this  matter  came  up 
again  in  the  Senate,  Jennifon  having  complied  with 
the  previous  refolve ;  and  his  petition,  together  with 
the  anfwer  of  Quock  Walker,  was  read.  It  was  then 
"  ordered,  that  Ifrael  Nichols,  Efq.,  with  fuch  as  the 
Houfe  mould  join  be  a  Committee  to  confider  this 
Petition  and  the  Anfwer,  hear  the  parties  and  report." 
On  the  following  day,  the  Houfe  concurred  and  ap 
pointed  MefTrs.  FefTenden  and  White  upon  the  joint 
Committee.  This  committee  of  both  Houfes  prefented 
their  report  on  the  2pth  of  April,  on  which  it  was 
"  Ordered  that  the  Petition  lie  till  fufficient  evidence 
be  produced  that  the  petitioner  loft  his  Law/'  Senate 
Journal,  n.,  344,  363.  Houfe  Journal,  n.,  676. 

The  next  movement  opens  a  wider  view  of  the 
whole  affair.  In  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  on 
the  1 8th  of  June,  a  new  petition  was  prefented  from 
Nathaniel  Jennifon,  cc  fetting  forth  that  he  was  de 
prived  of  ten  Negro  Servants  by  a  judgment  of  the 
Supreme  Judicial  Court  on  the  following  claufe  of  the 
Conftitution,  c  That  all  men  are  born  free  and  equal/ 
and  praying  that  if  faid  judgment  is  approved  of,  he 
may  be  freed  from  his  obligations  to  fupport  faid 
negroes."  Journal,  in.,  99. 

Jennifon' s  original  memorial,  of  which  the  notice 


218  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

on  the  Journal  is  an  abftract,  is  ftill  preferved.  He 
refpedfully  "  fhows  that  by  the  Bill  of  Rights  pre 
fixed  to  the  Conftitution  of  Government,  it  is  among 
other  things  declared  c  that  all  men  are  born  free  and 
equal/ — which  clauje  in  thejaid  Conftitution  has  been  the 
fubjeffi  of  much  altercation  and  dijpute — that  the  Judges 
of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court  have  Jo  conftrued  the  fame 
as  to  deprive  your  memorialift  of  a  great  part  of  his  pro 
perty,  to  which  he  thought  his  title  good,  not  only  by 
ancient  and  eftablifhed  ufage,  but  by  the  Laws  of  the 
Land.  That  your  Memorialift  having  been  pofTefTed 
of  Ten  Negro  Servants,  moft  of  whom  were  born  in 
his  family,  fome  of  them  young  and  helplefs,  others 
old  and  infirm,  is  now  informed  that  by  the  determina 
tion  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court,  the  Jaid  Clauje  in  the 
Bill  of  Rights  is  Jo  to  be  conftrued,  as  to  operate  to  the  total 
dijcharge  and  manumiffion  of  all  Negro  Servants  whatjo- 
ever.  What  the  true  meaning  of  faid  Claufe  in  the 
Conftitution  is,  your  Memorialift  will  not  undertake 
to  fay,  but  it  appears  to  him  the  operation  thereof  in 
manner  aforementioned,  is  very  different  from  what  the 
People  apprehended  at  the  time  the  fame  was  eftabliftied" 
He  argues  that  "  they  could  not  mean  to  offend 
the  Southern  States  in  fo  capital  a  point  with  them, 
and  thereby  to  endanger  the  Union,  and  what  is  more, 
they  could  not  mean  to  eftablifh  a  doctrine  repugnant 
and  contradictory  to  the  revealed  word  of  God."  He 
enforces  the  latter  argument  by  abundant  quotation 
from  the  25th  chapter  of  Leviticus;  and  concludes  his 
memorial  with  an  earneft  appeal  to  the  Legiflature, 
that  if  fervants  are  to  be  made  free,  their  mafters  may 
alfo  be  emancipated — regarding  the  ftatute  obligation 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  219 

to  provide  for  the  freedmen  whenever  they  fhould  be  in 
want,  as  a  fpecies  of  flavery  alfo  inconfiftent  with  the 
Bill  of  Rights. 

Jennifon' s  Memorial  was  at  once  cc  committed  to 
Colonel  Pope,  Mr.  Stow,  and  Dr.  Manning."  Journal, 
in.,  99.  We  find  no  further  direct  trace. of  it,  but, 
three  days  afterward,  a  bill  was  introduced  into  the 
Houfe,  entitled  "an  Act  repealing  an  Act  entitled  an 
Act  relating  to  Molatto  and  Negro  flaves ;  "  which 
was  read  a  firft  time  and  referred  to  the  next  feflion 
of  the  General  Court.  Journal^  in.,  418.  The  act 
thus  propofed  to  be  repealed  was  the  old  Province 
Law  of  1703,  Chap.  2,  whofe  provifions  in  reftraint 
of  emancipation,  etc.,  we  have  previoufly  noticed 
(ante,  pp.  53—4) ;  and  whofe  repeal  would  be  in  ac 
cordance  with  the  alternative  proportion  in  the  me 
morial  of  Jennifon. 

Whether  they  were  flimulated  by  the  new  views 
of  the  fubject  in  the  Houfe,  or  ccfufficient  evidence 
had  been  produced "  to  fatisfy  them  that  Jennifon 
had  cclofl  his  law,"  we  cannot  fay;  but  on  the  3d 
of  July,  1782,  the  Senate  pafTed  another  resolve,  "on 
the  petition  of  Nathaniel  Jennison,  permitting  him 
to  re-enter  his  appeal,  etc.,  at  the  Supreme  Judicial 
Court  at  Worcefter."  They  fent  it  down  for  concur 
rence,  but,  this  time,  the  Houfe  refufed  to  concur. 
Senate  Journal,  in.,  109. 

Having  taken  the  initiative  towards  repealing  the 
old  laws  concerning  the  rights  and  obligations  of 
matters  and  (laves,  they  may  have  thought  it  un- 
necefTary  to  promote  judicial  action,  until  the  new 
fyftem  fhould  be  perfected.  Nearly  three  months 


22O  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

afterward,  on  the  26th  of  September,  1782,  they  fent 
a  meflage  to  the  Senate  to  requeft  that  the  petition 
(and  refolve  thereon)  of  Mr.  Nathaniel  Jennifon,  "on 
the  files  of  the  Senate,  might  be  fent  down  to  the 
Houfe,  which  was  done.  Houfe  Journal,  in.,  203. 
Senate  Journal,  in.,  151.  We  find  no  further  action 
of  either  branch  of  the  Legislature  on  this  petition.1 

At  the  next  feflion  of  the  General  Court,  on  the 
yth  of  February,  1783,  the  bill  for  repealing  the  Act 
of  1703,  which  had  been  fo  referred,  was  brought  up 
and  read,  and  "Saturday,  10  o'clock,  affigned  for  the 
fecond  reading  thereof."  Houfe  Journal,  in.,  436. 
On  the  8th,  "  the  bill  was  taken  up  and  debated. 
Whereupon  it  was  ordered  that  Mr.  Sedgwick,  Gen. 
Ward,  Mr.  Dwight,  Mr.  Dane,  and  Mr.  Cranch,  be 
a  Committee  to  bring  in  a  bill  upon  the  following 
principles  : 

i ft.  Declaring  that  there  never  were  legal  flaves 

in  this  Government. 
2d.    Indemnifying    all    Mafters    who    have    held 

flaves  in  fact. 

3d.  To  make  fuch  provifions  for  the  fupport 
of  Negroes  and  Molattoes  as  the  Commit 
tee  may  find  moft  expedient."  Ibid.,  444. 

1  Nathaniel  Jennifon  appears  again  with  a  petition  in  the  Houfe,  on  the 
agth  of  May,  1784,  praying  that  a  judgment  obtained  againrt  him  in  a 
court  of  law  might  be  fet  afide.  It  was  referred  to  a  committee,  who  re 
ported,  on  the  ad  of  June,  1784,  a  refolve  granting  its  prayer.  Debate 
enfued,  and  the  refolve  was  re-committed.  On  the  4th  of  June,  the  com 
mittee  reported  another  refolve  for  flaying  the  execution  therein  mentioned 
in  part,  and  granting  a  new  trial.  This  was  accepted  and  fent  up  for  con 
currence.  Journal,  v.,  19-20,  30,  37.  We  have  been  unable  to  afcertain 
whether  the  judgment  and  execution  referred  to  have  any  connection  with 
the  flave  cafes. 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  221 

On  the  28th  of  February,  "a  Bill  intituled  an 
Act  refpecting  Negroes  and  Molattoes  was  read  the 
firft  time,  and  Saturday,  10  o'clock,  affigned  for  the 
fecond  reading  thereof."  Ibid.,  529.  It  was  read  a 
fecond  time  on  the  firft  of  March ;  and,  on  the  4th, 
was  read  a  third  time,  patted  to  be  engroffed,  and  fent 
up  for  concurrence.  Ibid.,  537.  In  the  Senate,  on 
the  yth  of  March,  "a  Bill  entitled  cAn  Act  respect 
ing  Negroes  and  Molattoes'  was  read  the  firft  time, 
and  ten  o'clock  to-morrow  is  affigned  for  the  fecond 
reading."  Senate  Journal,  in.,  413. 

But  it  never  had  that  fecond  reading;  and  this 
laft  attempt  in  the  legiflative  annals  of  Maffachufetts, 
to  provide,  at  the  fame  time,  for  the  hiftory  and  law 
of  flavery  within  her  own  borders,  came  to  an  un 
timely  end,  like  all  its  predecefforso 

If  the  bill  mould  be  found,  and  its  hiftory  more 
fully  explained,  efpecially  the  caufes  of  its  failure, 
much  additional  light  may  be  thrown  upon  the  ftate 
of  public  opinion  in  Maffachufetts  on  this  fubject 
in  1783.  As  to  the  propofed  declaration,  that  there 
never  were  legal  flaves  in  Maffachufetts,  we  need  only 
fay,  that  its  authors  could  hardly  have  been  familiar 
with  all  the  fads  of  that  hiftory  which  they  thus 
determined  to  fum  up  in  a  contradiction.  Neither 
that,  nor  the  proportion  to  indemnify  mafters  for 
their  loffes  by  emancipation  from  this  illegal  and 
illufive  flavery,  which  never  had  any  lawful  exiftence, 
was  ever  heard  of  again  in  that  day  and  generation. 
But  the  failure  to  make  fuitable  provifion  for  the 
fupport  of  Negroes  and  Mulattoes,  led  to  ferious 
difficulties,  great  embarraffment  in  the  law-courts  and 


222  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

Legislature,  conftant  and  continued  litigation,  in  which 
the  State  authorities,  towns,  and  individuals  con 
tinued  ftruggling  until  the  last  pauper  Indian,  negro, 
or  mulatto,  who  had  been  a  (lave,  relieved  himfelf 
and  the  community  by  dying  off.1  It  is  a  humilia 
ting  fact,  which  mould  not  be  omitted  here,  that 
the  moil  diftincl:  and  permanent  evidence  of  fervice 
of  the  colored  patriots  of  the  Revolution,  belonging 
to  MafTachufetts  (moft  of  whom  were  or  had  been 
flaves),  has  been  found  in  the  reports  of  the  law 
courts  in  pauper  cafes. 

Upon  a  comparifon  of  the  condition  of  the  negro 
in  MafTachufetts,  before  and  after  emancipation,  Dr. 
Belknap  faid  that,  c<  unlefs  liberty  be  reckoned  as  a 
compenfation  for  many  inconveniencies  and  hard- 

1  Many  petitions  were  prefented  to  the  Legiflature  concerning  the  sup 
port  of  pauper  negroes.  The  committee  on  the  revision  of  the  laws  were 
inftructed  to  report  who  was  refponsible.  "Journals,  ix.,  85,  125.  In  1790, 
the  Houfe  were  requefted  to  decide  whether  they  were  chargeable  to  the 
State  or  Towns.  Ib.,  X.,  230.  In  1793,  on  the  8th  of  March,  "  a  Bill  de 
termining  Indians,  Negroes,  and  Mulattoes,  who  are  objects  of  charity,  to 
be  the  poor  of  this  commonwealth,"  was  read  in  the  Houfe,  and  commit 
ted  to  Mr.  Sewall,  Mr.  Thompson,  and  Mr.  Smead.  Mafs.  Spy,  March 
21,  1793.  Dr.  Belknap  ftated,  in  1795,  that  the  queftion  had  not  then 
been  decided,  either  in  the  Legiflature  or  by  the  courts.  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  I., 
iv.,  208.  In  the  cafe  of  Shelbume  vs.  Greenfield,  in  Hampfhire,  1795,  the 
court  decided  that  certain  flaves  had  gained  a  fettlement  where  their  mas 
ters  were  fettled,  and  therefore  were  not  chargeable  on  the  commonwealth 
as  State  paupers.  They  gave  no  opinion  on  the  point,  whether  they  were 
to  be  the  charge  of  the  town,  or  of  their  late  matters  5  nor  was  this  point 
decided  when  James  Sullivan  communicated  the  report  of  this  cafe,  with 
others,  for  publication  in  1798.  M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  I.,  v.,  46,  47.  In  the  cafe 
of  The  Inhabitants  of  Shelburne  vs.  The  Inhabitants  of  Greenfield,  1795,  the 
children  of  two  negro  flaves  were  confidered  to  have  their  fettlement  in  the 
latter  town,  becaufe  their  parents  had  a  fettlement  there  under  their  matter ; 
although  the  parents  were  married,  and  their  children  born,  in  Shelburne. 
MS.  referred  to  in  Andover  vs.  Canton,  13  Mafs.  Reports,  552. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  223 

mips,  the  former  condition  "  was  in  mofl  cafes  prefe 
rable.  This  was  in  1795.  In  1846  a  Maflachufetts 
author  wrote  as  follows  refpecting  their  defcendants 
remaining  in  the  State : 

"A  prejudice  has  exifted  in  the  community,  and 
ftill  exiils  againft  them  on  account  of  their  color,  and 
on  account  of  their  being  the  defcendants  of  flaves. 
They  cannot  obtain  employment  on  equal  terms  with 
the  whites,  and  wherever  they  go  a  fneer  is  paffed 
upon  them,  as  if  this  fportive  inhumanity  were  an 
act  of  merit.  They  have  been,  and  are,  moftly  fer- 
vants,  or  doomed  to  accept  fuch  menial  employment 
as  the  whites  decline.  They  have  been,  and  are, 
fcattered  over  the  Commonwealth,  one  or  more  in 
over  two  thirds  of  all  the  towns ;  they  continue  poor, 
with  fmall  means  and  opportunities  for  enjoying  the 
focial  comforts  and  advantages  which  are  fo  much  at 
the  command  of  the  whites.  Thus,  though  their 
legal  rights  are  the  fame  as  thofe  of  the  whites,  their 
condition  is  one  of  degradation  and  dependence,  and 
renders  exiftence  lefs  valuable,  and  impairs  the  dura 
tion  of  life  itfelf.  .  .  .  Owing  to  their  color  and  the 
prejudice  againft  them,  they  can  hardly  be  faid  to  re 
ceive  .  .  .  even  fo  cordial  a  fympathy  as  would  be 
mown  to  them  in  ^Jlave  flate,  owing  to  their  different 
petition  in  fociety."  Chickering  s  Statistical  Fiewy 
p.  1 56.  In  view  of  thefe  fads,  it  will  hardly  be  deemed 
flrange,  that  the  fame  writer  calmly  contemplated 
their  extinction  as  a  race,  comforting  himfelf  with  the 
reflection,  that  "many  inftances  of  fimilar  difplace- 
ment  are  to  be  found  in  hiftory."  Ibid.,  pp.  1 59-60. 


224  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

X. 

WE  have  ftill  to  notice  two  acts  of  legiflation  in 
Maflachufetts,  which  were  patted  in  the  year  1788 — 
eight  years  after  the  alleged  termination  of  flavery  in 
that  State  by  the  adoption  of  the  Conftitution.  Thefe 
acts  were  parTed  jufl  after  the  adoption  of  the  Federal 
Conftitution  by  the  State  Convention. 

The  firft  is  the  only  one  directly  and  pofltively 
hoftile  to  flavery  to  be  found  among  all  their  ftatutes. 
It  is  a  very  remarkable  fact  that  the  reluctance  of  the 
Legiflature  to  meet  the  fubject  fairly  and  fully  in 
front  mould  have  left  their  ftatute-book  in  fo  ques 
tionable  a  fliape.  With  Portia,  glowing  with  delight 
at  the  unfuccefsful  choice  of  her  fable  fuitor,  they 
feem  to  have  wifhed  to  fay, 

"  A  gentle  riddance  :  draw  the  curtains  ;  go — 
Let  all  of  his  complexion  chufe  me  fo." 

Merchant  of  Venice,  Act  n.,  Sc.  vm. 

But  neither  the  cupidity  of  their  flave-trading 
merchants,  nor  the  peculiar  improvidence  of  the  negro 
—the  one  fharpened  by  fuccefsful  gain,  the  other 
hardened  into  hopelefs  acquiefcence  with  pauperifm — 
would  permit  this  "gentle  riddance/'  and  although 
the  "  curtains  "  have  been  "  drawn  "  over  thefe  dis 
agreeable  features  for  nearly  a  century,  the  hiftorian 
of  flavery  muft  let  in  the  light  upon  them. 

As  early  as  1785,  the  Legiflature  inftituted  an 
inquiry  as  to  the  meafures  proper  to  be  adopted  by 
them  to  difcountenance  and  prevent  any  inhabitant 
of  the  Commonwealth  being  concerned  in  the  flave- 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  225 

trade.  A  joint  committee  was  appointed  on  the 
fubjed,  Jan.  2 5th,  1785 — William  Heath  and  John 
Lowell  on  the  part  of  the  Senate,  and  Mr.  Reed,  Mr. 
Hofmer,  and  Mr.  Sprague,  of  the  Houfe.  The  in 
quiry  was  alfo  extended  to  the  condition  of  negroes 
then  in  the  Commonwealth,  or  who  might  thereafter 
come  or  be  brought  into  it.  H.  ofR.  Journals,  v.,  222. 
Bills  were  prepared  and  referred  to  the  Committee  on 
the  Revision  of  the  Laws,  with  inftruction  to  revife  all 
the  laws  refpecting  negroes  and  mulattoes,  and  report 
at  the  next  fitting  of  the  General  Court.  Ib.,  342. 

In  the  following  year,  March  i,  1786,  a  joint  order 
was  made  for  a  committee  to  report  meafures  for  pre 
venting  negroes  coming  into  the  Commonwealth  from 
other  States.  H.  of  R.  Journals,  vi.,  463.  Another 
fimilar  order  was  made  by  the  Houfe  of  Reprefenta- 
tives  in  1787.  Journals,  vn.,  524. 

Earlier  in  the  fame  year,  February  4,  1787,  a  num 
ber  of  African  blacks  petitioned  the  Legiflature  for 
aid  to  enable  them  to  return  to  their  native  country. 
Ib.,  vii.,  381.  A  Quaker  petition  againft  the  flave- 
trade  was  read  in  the  Senate,  June  20,  1787,  and  not 
accepted,  but  referred  to  the  Revifing  Committee, 
who  were  directed  to  report  a  bill  upon  "the  fubjedl 
matter  of  negroes  in  this  Commonwealth  at  large." 
Senate,  Vol.  vni.,  81.  H.  of  R.,  Vol.  vni.,  88. 

(The  prohibition  of  the  flave-trade  by  Maflachufetts 
was  at  laft  effected  in  1788..  A  moil  flagrant  and 
outrageous  cafe  of  kidnapping  occurred  in  Bofton  in 
the  month  of  February,  in  that  year.  M.  H.  S.  Coll., 
i.,  iv.,  204.  Additional  particulars  may  be  found  by 
reference  to  the  newfpapers  of  the  day.  Efpecially 
15 


226  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

The  N.  T.  Packet,  Feb.  26  and  Aug.  29,  1788.  This 
infamous  tranfaction  aroufed  the  public  indignation, 
and  all  clafTes  united  in  urging  upon  the  Legislature 
the  paflage  of  effectual  laws  to  prevent  the  further 
profecution  of  the  traffic,  and  protect  the  inhabitants 
of  the  State  againfl  the  repetition  of  fimilar  outrages. 

Rev.  Dr.  Jeremy  Belknap  was  one  of  the  foremoft 
in  promoting  the  paflage  of  this  act.  He  confulted 
fome  of  his  friends  as  to  the  practicability  of  improv 
ing  the  occafion  to  effect  the  abolition  of  flavery  in 
the  State.  His  brother-in-law,  Mr.  Samuel  Eliot, 
agreed  with  him  that  the  time  was  moft  opportune, 
but  faid  the  difficulty  in  fuch  cafes  was,  who  fhould 
ftep  forward, — and  recommended  him  to  fuggefl  to 
the  Aflbciation  of  minifters,  at  their  next  meeting,  a 
petition  to  the  General  Court,  whofe  feflion  was  then 
about  to  commence  ;  if  he  failed  to  gain  the  co-opera 
tion  of  the  ministers,  to  apply  to  the  Humane  Society,, 
and  at  all  events  to  have  a  petition  drafted. 

Mr.  Belknap  drew  up  a  petition,  which  his  friends 
pronounced  cc  incapable  of  amendment,"  gained  the 
fupport  of  the  Aflbciation,  and  of  a  large  number  of 
citizens  befides.  The  blacks  alfo  prefented  a  peti 
tion,1  written  by  Prince  Hall,  one  of  their  number, 
and  there  was  alfo  that  of  the  Quakers  in  1787,  al 
ready  noticed,  before  the  Legiflature.  Life  of  Belknap, 
159^60. 

i  he  movement  was  fuccefsful,  and  on  the  26th  of 
Larch,  1788,  the  Legiflature  of  Maflachufetts  pafled 


1  The  petition  of  the  negroes,  27th  February,  1788,  Is  in  the  Mafla 
chufetts  Spy,  24th  April,  1788. 


Slavery  in  Majfachujetts.  227 

"  An  Aft  to  prevent  the  Slave-Trade,  and  for  granting 
Relief  to  the  Families  of  fuch  unhappy  Perfons  as  may  be 
Kidnapped  or  decoyed  away  from  this  Commonwealth" 
By  this  law  it  was  enacted  "  that  no  citizen  of  this 
Commonwealth,  or  other  perfon  refiding  within  the 
fame,"  mall  import,  tranfport,  buy,  or  fell  any  of  the 
inhabitants  of  Africa  as  flaves  or  fervants  for  term  of 
years,  on  penalty  of  fifty  pounds  for  every  perfon  fo 
mifufed,  and  two  hundred  pounds  for  every  vefTel 
fitted  out  and  employed  in  the  traffic.  All  infurance 
made  on  fuch  veffels  to  be  void,  and  of  no  effect.  And 
to  meet  the  cafe  of  kidnapping,  when  inhabitants  were 
carried  off,  -actions  of  damage  might  be  brought  by 
their  friends — the  latter  giving  bonds  to  apply  the 
moneys  recovered  to  the  ufe  and  maintenance  of  the 
family  of  the  injured  party, 

A  provifo  was  added,  cc  That  this  aft  do  not  extend 
to  veffels  which  have  already  Jailed \  their  owners,  factors, 
or  commanders,  for,  and  during  their  prefent  voyage,  or  to 
any  infurance  that  fliall  have  been  made,  previous  to  the 
faffing  of  the  fame"  How  far  this  provifo  may  be 
juftly  held  to  be  a  legiflative  fanction  of  the  traffic,  we 
leave  the  reader  to  decide.  It  is  obvious  that  the 
"  public  fentiment"  of  Maffachufetts  in  1788  was  not 
ftrong  enough  againft  the  flave-trade,  even  under  the 
atrocious  provocation  of  kidnapping  in  the  ftreets 
of  Bofton,  to  treat  the  pirates,  who  had  already  failed, 
as  they  deferved.  Rome  was  not  built  in  a  day,— 
neither  could  the  modern  Athens  rejoice  in  an  anti- 
flavery  Minerva,  frefh  in  an  inflant  from  the  brain 
of  the  almighty  cc  public  fentiment "  of  Maffachu 
fetts. 


228  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

This  act,  as  we  have  feen,  patted  on  the  25th  of 
March,  1788.  It  was  accompanied  by  another  act, 
pafTed  on  the  following  day,  hardly  lefs  hoflile  to  the 
negro  than  this  was  to  flavery — the  pioneer  of  a  feries 
of  fimilar  acts  (though  lefs  fevere)  which  have  fubject- 
ed  the  new  States  to  mofl  unfparing  cenfure. 

The  Maflachufetts  Law,  entitled  "An  att  for 
fuppreffing  and  punijhing  of  Rogues,  Vagabonds,  common 
Beggars,  and  other  idle,  disorderly,  and  lewd  Perjons" 
was  prefented  in  the  Senate  on  the  6th  of  March, 
1788.  It  went  through  the  ufual  flages  of  legiila- 
tion,  with  various  amendments,  and  was  finally  pafTed 
on  the  26th  of  March,  1788.  It  contains  the  follow 
ing  very  remarkable  provifion  : 

"V.  Be  it  further  enafted  by  the  authority  aforesaid 
[the  Senate  and  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  in  General 
Court  aflembled],  that  no  perfon  being  an  African  or 
Negro,  other  than  a  fubject  of  the  Emperor  of  Mo 
rocco,  or  a  citizen  of  fome  one  of  the  United  States 
(to  be  evidenced  by  a  certificate  from  the  Secretary  of 
the  State  of  which  he  mall  be  a  citizen),  mall  tarry 
within  this  Commonwealth,  for  a  longer  time  than  two 
months,  and  upon  complaint  made  to  any  Juflice  of 
the  Peace  within  this  Commonwealth,  that  any  fuch 
perfon  has  been  within  the  fame  more  than  two 
months,  the  faid  Juflice  mall  order  the  faid  perfon  to 
depart  out  of  this  Commonwealth,  and  in  cafe  that 
the  faid  African  or  Negro  mall  not  depart  as  afore- 
faid,  any  Juflice  of  the  Peace  within  this  Common 
wealth,  upon  complaint  and  proof  made  that  fuch 
perfon  has  continued  within  this  Commonwealth  ten 
days  after  notice  given  him  or  her  to  depart  as  afore- 


Slavery  in  Maffachufetts.  229 

faid,  fhall  commit  the  faid  perfon  to  any  houfe  of  cor 
rection  within  the  county,  there  to  be  kept  to  hard 
labour,  agreeable  to  the  rules  and  orders  of  the  faid 
houfe,  until  the  Seflions  of  the  Peace,  next  to  be  holden 
within  and  for  the  faid  county;  and  the  matter  of  the 
faid  houfe  of  correction  is  hereby  required  and  directed 
to  tranfmit  an  attefled  copy  of  the  warrant  of  commit 
ment  to  the  faid  Court  on  the  firft  day  of  their  faid 
feffion,  and  if  upon  trial  at  the  faid  Court,  it  mail  be 
made  to  appear  that  the  faid  perfon  has  thus  contin 
ued  within  the  Commonwealth,  contrary  to  the  tenor 
of  this  act,  he  or  me  mail  be  whipped  not  exceeding 
ten  ftripes,  and  ordered  to  depart  out  of  this  Com 
monwealth  within  ten  days ;  and  if  he  or  me  mall  not 
fo  depart,  the  fame  procefs  mall  be  had  and  punifh- 
ment  inflicted,  and  fo  toties  quoties"  l 

The  edition  from  which  we  copy  is  the  earlieft 
claffified  edition  of  "The  Perpetual  Laws  of  the 
Commonwealth  of  Maflachufetts,"  and  is  not  to  be 
found  in  Part  I.  among  thofe  relating  to  "  The  Pub- 
lick  and  Private  Rights  of  Perfons,"  nor  among  the 
"Mifcellaneous"  Statutes,  but  in  "Part  IV.,"  con 
cerning  "  Criminal  Matters."  We  doubt  if  anything 
in  human  legiflation  can  be  found  which  comes  nearer 
branding  color  as  a  crime ! 

By  this  law,  it  will  be  obferved  that  all  negroes, 

1  The  old  provincial  ftatute,  from  which  this  law  was  mainly  copied, 
provided  for  the  correftion  by  whipping,  etc.,  of  the  rogues  and  vagabonds 
(without  dittinftion  of  color)  for  whofe  benefit  the  original  law  was  de- 
figned  5  but  in  the  progrefs  of  this  law  through  the  Legiflature,  this  feature 
was  ftricken  out  of  that  portion  of  the  bill,  but  the  "  African  or  Negro  " 
gained  what  the  "rogue  and  vagabond"  loft  by  the  change.  Compare 
Mafs.  Pro<v.  Laws  0/1699,  Chap,  vi.,  and  Journal  of  H.  of  R.t  vin.,  500. 


230  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

refident  in  Maflachufetts,  not  citizens  of  fome  one  of 
the  States,  were  required  to  depart  in  two  months,  on 
penalty  of  being  apprehended,  whipped,  and  ordered 
to  depart.     The  procefs  and  punifhment  could  be  re 
newed  every  two  months.     The   only  contemporary 
explanation  of  the  delign  of  the  law  which  we  have 
met  with  is  to  the  effect  that  it  was  intended  to  pre 
vent  fugitive   flaves  from  reforting  to  that  State,  in 
hopes  to  obtain  freedom,  and  then  being  thrown  as  a 
deadweight  upon  that  community.    Belknap,  1795.    A 
recent  writer  ftates  that  this  "  enactment  was  faid  to 
have  been  the  work  of   her   [Maflachufetts]    leading 
lawyers,  who  were  fufficiently  fagacious  to  forefee  the 
dangerous  confequences  of  that  conftitutional  provis 
ion  which,  on  restoring  fugitives  from  labor,  not  only 
threatened  to  difturb  the  public  peace,  but  the  {lability 
of  the  fyftem."    Amory  s  Life  of  Sullivan,  i.,  226,  note. 
We  give  this  illustration  of  legal    fagacity  in  MarTa- 
chufetts  for  what  it  is  worth,  although  we  are  fatisfied 
that  the  ftatute  itfelf  clearly  illustrates  the  intention  of 
thofe  who  framed  it.    Expofitio  contemporanea  eft  optima. 
Realizing  the  "deadweight"  already  refting  upon 
them  in  the  body  of  their  own  free  negroes  (though 
comparatively    fmall     in     number),    they    evidently 
thought  it  <c fagacious"  to  prevent  any  addition  to  it. 
Future  refearch  muft  afcertain  who  were  "  citizens " 
of  Maflachufetts  in  1788,  before  we  can  fafely  declare 
that  even   Maflachufetts  Negroes,  Indians,  and  Mu- 
lattoes,  were  exempted  from  the  alternative  of  exile 
or  the  penalties  of  this  ftatute.      The  reader  will  not 
fail  to  notice  below,  the  arbitrary  and  illegal  extenfion 
of  the  ftatute,  in  its  application  to  "people  of  color, 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  231 

commonly  called  Mulatto es,  prejumed  to  come  within 
the  intention  "  of  the  law. 

We  have  met  with  one  example  of  the  enforce 
ment  of  this  law,  which  is  almofl  as  "fingular"  as 
the  ftatute  itfel£  In  the  Maffachufetts  Mercury,  Bos 
ton,  printed  by  Young  and  Minns,  Printers  to  the  Hon 
orable  the  General  Court,  September  16,  1800,  No.  22, 
Vol.  xvi.,  the  following  notice  occupies  a  confpicuous 
place,  filling  a  column  of  the  paper : 

NOTICE  TO  BLACKS. 

'  I  *HE  Officers  of  Police  having  made  return  to 
the  Subfcriber  of  the  names  of  the  following 
perfons,  who  are  Africans  or  Negroes,  not  fubjefts 
of  the  Emperor  of  Morocco  nor  citizens  of  the 
United  States,  the  fame  are  hereby  warned  and 
diredled  to  depart  out  of  this  Commonwealth 
before  the  loth  day  of  Odober  next,  as  they 
would  avoid  the  pains  and  penalties  of  the  law  in 
that  cafe  provided,  which  was  pafled  by  the  Legis 
lature,  March  26,  1788. 

CHARLES  BULFINCH, 

Superintendant. 
By  order  and  direction  of  the  Selectmen. 

OF  PORTSMOUTH. 

Prince  Patterson,  Eliza  Cotton, 

Flora  Nam. 

RHODE  ISLAND. 

Thomas  Nichols  and  Philis  Nichols, 

Hannah  Champlin,  Plato  Alderfon, 

Raney  Scott,  Jack  Jeffers, 

Thomas  Gardner,  Julius  Holden, 

Violet  Freeman,  CufFy  Buffum, 

Sylvia  Gardner,  Hagar  Blackburn, 

Dolly  Peach,  Polly  Gardner, 

Sally  Alexander,  Philis  Taylor. 


232 


Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 


Dinah  Miller, 
Rhode  Allen, 
Richard  Freeman, 
Nancy  Gardner, 

Briftol  Morandy, 
Scipio  Kent, 
Phoebe  Seamore, 
Jack  Billings. 

John  Denny, 
Hannah  Burdine. 


PROVIDENCE. 

Silvia  Hendrick, 
Nancy  Hall, 
Elizabeth  Freeman, 
Margaret  Harrifon. 

CONNECTICUT. 

John  Cooper, 
Margaret  Ruflell, 
Phoebe  Johnfon, 

NEW  LONDON. 

Thomas  Burdine, 


Sally  Evens, 
Czefar  Weft  and 
Thomas  Peterfon, 
Henry  Sanderfon, 
Robert  Willet, 
Mary  Atkins, 
Amey  Spalding, 
Rebecca  Johnfon, 
Prince  Kilfbury, 
Jofeph  Hicks, 
Elizabeth  Francis, 
William  Williams, 
David  Dove, 
Peter  Bayle, 
Katy  Boftick, 
Margaret  Bean, 
Samuel  Benjamin, 
Primus  Hutchinfon. 


NEW  YORK. 

Sally  Freeman, 
Hannah  Weft, 
Thomas  Santon, 
Henry  Wilfon, 
Edward  Cole, 
Polly  Brown, 
John  Johnfon, 
George  Homes, 
Abraham  Fitch, 
Abraham  Francis, 
Sally  Williams, 
Rachel  Pewinck, 
Efther  Dove, 
Thomas  Boftick, 
Prince  Hayes, 
Nancy  Hamik, 
Peggy  Ocamum, 


PHILADELPHIA. 


Mary  Smith, 
Simon  Jeffers, 
Peter  Francies, 
Elizabeth  Branch, 
William  Brown, 


Richard  Allen, 
Samuel  Pofey, 
Prince  Wales, 
Peter  Guft, 
Butterfield  Scotland, 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  233 

Clariffa  Scotland,  Cuffy  Cummings, 

John  Gardner,  Sally  Gardner, 

Fortune  Gorden,  Samuel  Stevens. 

BALTIMORE. 

Peter  Larkin  and  Jenny  Larkin, 

Stepney  Johnfon,  Anne  Melville. 

VIRGINIA. 

James  Scott,  John  Evens, 

Jane  Jackfon,  Cuffey  Cook, 

Oliver  Nam,  Robert  Woodfon, 
Thomas  Thompfon. 

NORTH  CAROLINA, 

James  Jurden,  Polly  Johnfon, 

Janus  Crage. 

SOUTH  CAROLINA. 

Anthony  George,  Peter  Cane. 

HALIFAX. 

Catherine  Gould,  Charlotte  Gould, 

Cato  Small,  Philis  Cole, 

Richard  M'Coy. 

WEST  INDIES. 

James  Morfut  and  Hannah,  his  wife, 

Mary  Davis,  George  Powell, 

Peter  Lewis,  Charles  Sharp, 

Peter  Hendrick,  William  Shoppo  and 

Mary  Shoppo,  Ifaac  Johnfon, 

John  Pearce,  Charles  Efings, 

Peter  Branch,  Newell  Symonds, 

Rofanna  Symonds,  Peter  George, 

Lewis  Victor,  Lewis  Sylvefter, 

John  Laco,  Thomas  Fofter, 

Peter  Jefemy,  Rebecca  Jefemy, 

David  Bartlet,  Thomas  Grant, 

Jofeph  Lewis,  Hamet  Lewis, 

John  Harrifon,  Mary  Brown, 
Bofton  Alexander. 

CAPE    FRANCOIS. 

Cafme  Francifco  and        Nancy,  his  wife, 
Mary  Fraceway. 


234  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

AUX  CAYES. 

Sufannah  Rofs. 

PORT  AU  PRINCE. 

John  Short. 

JAMAICA. 

Charlotte  Morris,  John  Robinfon. 

BERMUDA. 

Thomas  Williams. 

NEW  PROVIDENCE. 

Henry  Taylor. 

LIVERPOOL. 

John  Mumford. 

AFRICA. 

Francis  Thompfon,  John  Brown, 

Mary  Jofeph,  James  Melvile, 

Samuel  Bean,  Hamlet  Earl, 

Calo  Gardner,  Charles  Mitchel, 

Sophia  Mitchel,  Samuel  Frazier, 

Samuel  Blackburn,  Timothy  Philips, 
Jofeph  Ocamunit 

FRANCE. 

Jofeph 

ISLE  OF  FRANCE. 

Jofeph  Lovering. 

LIST  OF  INDIANS  AND  MULATTOES. 

The  following  perfons  from  feveral  of  the 
United  States,  being  people  of  colour,  commonly 
called  Mulattoes,  are  prefumed  to  come  within  the 
intention  of  the  fame  law  ;  and  are  accordingly 
warned  and  directed  to  depart  out  of  the  Com 
monwealth  before  the  loth  day  of  Oftober  next. 

RHODE  ISLAND. 

Peter  Badger,  Kelurah  Allen, 

Waley  Green,  Silvia  Babcock. 

PROVIDENCE. 

Polly  Adams,  Paul  Jones. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  235 


CONNECTICUT. 

John  Brown,  Polly  Holland, 

John  Way  and  Nancy  Way, 

Peter  Virginia,  Leville  Steward, 

Lucinda  Orange,  Anna  Sprague, 

Britton  Doras,  Amos  Willis, 
Frank  Francies. 

NEW-LONDON. 

Hannah  Potter. 

NEW-YORK. 

Jacob  and  Nelly  Cum-     James  and  Rebecca  Smith, 

mings,  Judith  Chew, 

John  Schumagger,  Thomas  Willouby, 

Peggy  Willouby,  John  Reading, 

Mary  Reading,  Charles  Brown, 

John  Miles,  Hannah  Williams, 

Betfy  Harris,  Duglafs  Brown, 

Sufannah  Fofter,  Thomas  Burros, 

Mary  Thomfon,  James  and  Freelove  Buck, 

Lucy  Glapcion,  Lucy  Lewis, 

Eliza  Williams,  Diana  Bayle, 

Caefar  and  Sylvia  Caton, Thompfon, 

William  Guin. 

ALBANY. 

Elone  Virginia,  Abijah  Reed  and 

Lydia  Reed,  Abijah  Reed,  Jr., 

Rebecca  Reed  and  Betfy  Reed. 

NEW-JERSEY. 

Stephen  Boadley,  Hannah  Viftor. 

PHILADELPHIA. 

Polly  Boadley,  James  Long, 

Hannah  Murray,  Jeremiah  Green, 

Nancy  Principefo,  David  Johnfon, 

George  Jackfon,  William  Coak, 
Mofes  Long. 

MARYLAND. 

Nancy  Guft. 


23  6  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

BALTIMORE. 

John  Clark,  Sally  Johnfon. 

VIRGINIA. 

Sally  Hacker,  Richard, 

John  Johnfon,  Thomas  Steward, 

Anthony  Paine,  Mary  Burk, 

William  Hacker,  Polly  Lofours, 

Betfy  Guin,  Lucy  Brown. 

AFRICA. 

Nancy  Doras.1 

This  notice  muft  have  been  generally  published  in 
Bofton,  and  was  copied  in  other  cities  without  the 
lift  of  names.  We  have  met  with  it  in  the  Com 
mercial  Advertifer  of  the  2oth  September,  1800,  and 
the  Daily  Advertifer,  22d  September,  1800,  both  in 
New  York.  Alfo  in  the  Gazette  of  the  United 
States  and  Daily  Advertifer  of  2jd  September,  1800, 
in  Philadelphia. 

The  only  comments  of  the  Bofton  prefs  on  the 
fubject  which  we  have  feen  indicate  that  it  was  sim 
ply  carrying  out  the  original  defign  of  the  act,  to  abate 
pauperifm ;  2  but  references  to  it  in  the  New  York  and 
Philadelphia  papers  hint  at  another  probable  caufe 

1  Mr.  Nell,  in  his  work  on  the  Colored  Patriots  of  the  American  Revo 
lution,  notices  (pp.  96-97),  an   African  Benevolent  Society,  inftituted  at 
Bofton,  in  1796.     He  fays,  its  benevolent  objects  were  fet  forth  in  the  pre 
amble,  which  alfo  expressed  its  loyalty  as  follows  :  "  Behaving  ourfelves,  at 
the  fame  time,  as  true  and  faithful  citizens  of  the  Commonwealth  in  which 
we  live,  and  that  we  take  no  one  into  the  Society  who  fhall  commit  any  in 
justice  or  outrage  againft  the  laws  of  their  country."     He  adds  a  lift  of  the 
members  of  the  "  African  Society."     A  comparifon  of  this  lift  with  that 
above  mows  that  one  fourth  of  the  members  were  driven  out  of  the  Com 
monwealth  in  1800. 

2  See  "  Africanus,"  in   'The  Independent  Chronicle  and  the  Universal 
Advertifer y  Bofton,  September  25,  1800. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  237 

of  this  flringent  and  fweeping  application  of  the 
ftatute. 

In  the  year  1800,  the  whole  country  was  excited 
by  the  difcovery  of  an  alleged  plot  for  a  general  infur- 
rection  of  negroes  at  the  South.  Gabriel,  the  negro- 
general,  was  the  "hero,"  though  not  the  only  victim. 
The  affair  aflumed  at  once  a  very  ferious  afpect,  and 
the  alarm  was  "awful"  in  Virginia  and  South  Caro 
lina.  The  party  violence  of  the  day  was  not  flow  to 
make  ufe  of  it,  and  it  was  doubtlefs  true,  that  the 
principles  of  Liberty  and  Equality  had  been  in  fome 
degree  infufed  into  the  minds  of  the  negroes,  and  that 
the  incautious  and  intemperate  ufe  of  thefe  words  by 
the  cc  fierce  democracie"  of  that  day  in  Virginia  may 
have  infpired  them  with  hopes  of  fuccefs. 

But  the  alarm  was  not  confined  to  Virginia.  Even 
in  Bofton,  fears  were  exprefTed  and  meafures  of  pre 
vention  adopted.  N.  T.  Advertijer,  Sept.  26,  1800. 
The  Gazette  of  the  United  States  and  Daily  Ad- 
vertifer,  by  C.  P.  Wayne,  Vol.  xvin.,  No.  2493, 
Philadelphia,  September  23,  1800,  copies  the  "No 
tice  "  with  thefe  remarks  : 

"  The  following  notice  has  been  publifhed  in  the 
Bofton  papers :  It  feems  probable,  from  the  nature 
of  the  notice,  that  fome  fufpicions  of  the  defign  of 
the  negroes  are  entertained,  and  we  regret  to  fay  there 
is  too  much  caufe." 

Such  was  the  act,  and  fuch  was  one  of  its  applica 
tions.  Additional  ads  were  pafTed  in  1798  and  1802, 
but  this  portion  was  neither  modified  nor  repealed. 
It  appears  in  the  revifed  edition  of  1807,  without 
change.  In  1821,  the  Legiflature  of  MafTachufetts, 


238  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

alarmed  by  "the  increafe  of  a  fpecies  of  population, 
which  threatened  to  become  both  injurious  and  bur- 
denfome,"  and,  fully  alive  to  "the  neceffity  of  check 
ing  "  it,  appointed  a  committee  to  report  a  bill 
concerning  the  admiffion  into  the  State  of  free  Ne 
groes  and  Mulattoes. 

In  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  June  7,  1821, 
it  was  "  Ordered,  that  Meflrs.  Lyman  of  Boflon, 
Bridgeman  of  Belchertown,  Chandler  of  Lexington,  be 
a  Committee  to  take  into  confideration  the  expediency 
of  making  any  alterations  in  the  laws  of  this  Com 
monwealth  concerning  the  admiflion  into  a  refidence 
in  this  State  of  Negroes  and  Mulattoes,  with  leave  to 
report  by  bill  or  otherwife."  Journals,  Vol.  XLII.,  62. 
On  the  I4th  of  June,  the  journal  notes  a  Report  on 
the  Free  Negroes,  detailing  a  ftatement  of  fads,  and 
authorizing  the  appointment  of  a  committee  to  report 
a  bill  at  the  next  feffion.  Read  and  accepted,  and  the 
fame  gentlemen  were  appointed.  Ibid.,  121.  On  the 
next  day,  the  Houfe  refufed  to  reconfider  the  vote  for 
a  committee,  etc.  Ibid.,  129. 

At  the  next  feffion,  on  the  I5th  of  January,  1822, 
a  "report  of  the  Committee  appointed  at  the  laft 
feffion  concerning  the  admiffion  into  this  State  of 
Free  Negroes,  praying  to  be  difcharged  from  that 
fubjecl,  was  read,  and  the  fame  was  ordered  to  lie  on 
the  table.  The  fame  was  afterwards  accepted."  Ibid., 
174. 

This  report,  written  by  Theodore  Lyman,  Jr., 
chairman  of  the  Committee,  was  printed.  It  justifies 
the  motive  which  induced  the  appointment  of  the 
Committee  by  the  following  ftatements :  "that  the 


Slavery  in  Majfachufetts.  239 

black  convicts  in  the  State  Prifon,  on  the  firft  of  Jan 
uary,  1821,  formed  146^  part  of  the  black  population 
of  the  State,  while  the  white  convicts,  at  the  fame 
time,  formed  but  2140  part  of  the  white  population. 
It  is  believed  that  a  fimilar  proportion  will  be  found 
to  exift  in  all  public  eftablimments  of  this  State;  as 
well  Prifons  as  Poor-Houfes."  The  Committee, 
however,  cc  found  it  impoffible,  after  all  the  refearch 
and  deliberation  in  their  power  to  beftow  on  the  fub- 
ject,  to  accomplifh  that  duty  which  they  undertook 
by  the  direction  of  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives. 
They  have  not  fucceeded  in  preparing  a  bill,  the  pro- 
vifions  of  which  they  could  conjcientioufly  vindicate  to  this 
Houfe.  They  have  already  found  in  the  Statute  Books  of 
this  Commonwealth,  a  law  faffed  in  1788,  regulating  the 
refidence  in  this  State  of  certain  perfons  of  color — they  be 
lieve  that  this  law  has  never  been  enforced,  and,  ineffec 
tual  as  it  has  proved,  they  would  never  have  been  the 
authors  of  placing  among  the  Statutes,  a  law  Jo  arbitrary 
in  its  principles,  and  in  its  operation  Jo  little  accordant 
with  the  inftitutions,  feelings,  and  practices  of  the  people  of 
this  Commonwealth.  The  Hiftory  of  that  law  has  well 
convinced  the  Committee  that  no  meafure  (which 
they  could  devife)  would  be  attended  with  the  fmall- 
eft  good  confequence.  That  it  would  have  been  mat 
ter  of  fatisfaction  and  congratulation  to  the  Commit 
tee  if  they  had  fucceeded  in  framing  a  law,  which 
mould  have  received  the  approbation  of  this  Legifla- 
ture,  and  mould  have  promifed  to  check  and  finally 
to  overcome  an  evil  upon  which  they  have  never  been 
able  to  look  with  unconcern.  But  a  law,  which 
ftiould  produce  that  effect,  would  entirely  depart  from 


240  Notes  on  the  Hiftory  of 

that  love  of  humanity,  that  refpect  for  hofpitality  and 
for  the  juft  rights  of  all  clafTes  of  men,  in  the  conftant 
and  fuccefsful  exercife  of  which,  the  inhabitants  of 
MafTachufetts  have  been  fingularly  confpicuous." 

The  committee,  however,  did  not  recommend  a 
repeal  of  the  act  of  1788.  Is  it  poffible  to  avoid  the 
inference  that  the  true  reafon  of  their  failure  to  report 
a  new  bill,  fuch  as  they  were  inftructed  to  prepare, 
was  that  they  confidered  the  State  amply  protected  by 
the  old  law  ? 

It  appears  again  in  the  revifed  laws  of  1823.  An 
other  additional  act  was  parTed  in  1825,  but  without 
alteration  of  the  provision  againft  negroes ;  and  this 
ftatute,  cc  fo  arbitrary  in  its  principle,  and  in  its  opera 
tion  fo  little  accordant  with  the  inftitutions,  feelings 
and  practices  of  the  people  of  the  Commonwealth," 
continued  to  difgrace  the  Statute-Book  of  MarTachu- 
fetts  until  the  firft  day  of  April,  1 834,  after  which  time 


1  Although  this  committee  did  not  accomplifh  their  afllgned  taflc,  they 
did  achieve  a  further  report,  by  way  of  addition,  which  deferves  notice. 
They  agreed  that  "  it  does  not  comport  with  the  dignity  of  this  State,  to 
withhold  that  brief  ftatement  of  fa£ts,  to  be  found  in  its  annals,  concerning 
the  abolition  of  this  trade  in  MafTachufetts — a  ftatement  which  will  prove 
both  highly  honorable,  and  in  perfeft  accordance  with  that  remarkable 
fpirit  of  wholefome  and  rational  liberty,  by  which  this  Commonwealth  has 
been  greatly  diftinguifhed  from  the  earlieft  period.  But  to  the  clear  under- 
ftanding  and  better  elucidation  of  this  fubjeft,  the  committee  think  it  ufeful 
to  introduce  the  following  fhort  account  of  the  exiftence  of  Slavery  in 
Maflachufetts."  In  the  elaborate  ftatement  which  follows,  there  are  no  im 
portant  fafts  which  are  not  already  familiar  to  the  reader  of  thefe  notes ; 
but  there  is  one  idea  which  has,  at  leaft,  the  merit  of  novelty.  After  giving 
the  general  ftatiftics  of  the  flave  population,  down  to  the  time  of  the 
Revolution,  they  fay,  "  Thefe  flaves  were  procured  in  feveral  ways — either 
from  the  Dutch,  in  Ne-iv  Tork,  from  the  Southern  provinces  in  North 
America  .  .  .  Few  came  by  a  direft  trade,"  etc. 


Slavery  in  Maffachujetts.  241 

its  undiftinguifhed  repeal,  (in  the  general  repealing 
fection  of  an  act  of  March  29th,  1834,  for  the  regu 
lation  of  Gaols  and  Houfes  of  Correction,)  no  longer 
left  "  public  opinion  "  to  regulate  its  enforcement. 


And  here  we  reft.  With  the  exception  of  the 
repeal,  already  mentioned,  ante,  p.  59,  of  the  law  pro 
hibiting  the  intermarriage  of  whites  with  Indians, 
Negroes,  or  Mulattoes,  and  the  obfcure  ftatute  of 
1863,  which  terminated  the  long  exclufion  of  the  lat 
ter  from  the  ranks  of  the  State  militia,  and  perhaps 
obliterated  the  laft  veftige  of  the  formal  legiflation  of 
MafTachufetts  againft  them,  there  is  nothing  in  the 
fubfequent  hiftory  or  politics  of  the  State  relating  to 
the  fubject  of  thefe  Notes.  The  anti-flavery  agita 
tions  of  the  laft  thirty  years,  in  which  Maflachufetts 
has  borne  fo  confpicuous  a  part,  have  little  if  any 
hiftorical  connection  with  the  exiftence  of  Slavery  in 
that  Commonwealth,  As  "agreed  on  all  hands,"  it  was 
undoubtedly  "  confldered  as  abolimed  ;"  and  during 
thefe  ftormy  and  portentous  contefts  which  have 
changed  the  hiftory  of  the  nation,  it  has  been  "  put 
afide  and  covered,"  and  cc  remembered  only  as  for 
gotten." 

The  reader  of  thefe  Notes  cannot  fail  to  notice  the 
ftrong  refemblance  in  the  mode  of  the  extinction  of 
flavery  in  Maflachufetts  and  that  of  villenage  in 
16 


242  Notes  on  the  Hiftory,  Etc. 

England.  Of  the  latter  Lord  Mansfield  faid,  in 
1785,  that  "villains  in  grofs  may  in  point  of  law  fub- 
fifl  at  this  day.  But  the  change  of  manners  and  cus 
toms  has  effectually  abolifhed  them  in  point  of  fad." 
Ante,  p.  115,  note.  If  the  parallel  may  be  continued, 
it  could  be  faid  with  equal  juftice  that  flavery,  hav 
ing  never  been  formally  prohibited  by  legiflation  in 
Maflachufetts,  continued  to  "fubfift  in  point  of  law" 
until  the  year  1866,  when  the  grand  Conftitutional 
Amendment  terminated  it  forever  throughout  the 
limits  of  the  United  States.  It  would  be  not  the 
leaft  remarkable  of  the  circumftances  connected  with 
this  ftrange  and  eventful  hiftory,  that,  although  vir 
tually  abolifhed  before,  the  actual  prohibition  of 
flavery  in  Maflachufetts  as  well  as  Kentucky,  mould 
be  accomplimed  by  the  votes  of  South  Carolina  and 
Georgia. 


APPENDIX. 


A.    THE  MILITARY  EMPLOYMENT  OF  NEGROES  IN  MASSACHUSETTS. 

THE  neceffities  of  the  fituation,  for  a  few  years  after  the  firft  fettle- 
ments,  made  everybody  a  foldier ;  indeed,  put  arms  in  the  hands  of 
women  and  children. 

The  General  Court  made  an  order  on  the  27th  of  May,  1652, 
"  that  all  Scotfmen,  Negeres  and  Indians  inhabiting  with  or  fervants  to 
the  Englilh  from  the  age  of  fixteen  to  fixty  years,  fhal  be  lifted,  and 
are  hereby  enjoyned  to  attend  traynings  as  well  as  the  Englifh."  At 
the  feffion  in  May,  1656,  however,  this  order  was  repealed,  fo  far  as 
it  related  to  negroes  and  Indians,  as  follows  : 

"  For  the  better  ordering  and  fettling  of  feverall  cafes  in  the  mili 
tary  companyes  within  this  jurifdidlion,  which,  upon  experience,  are 
found  either  wanting  or  inconvenient,  it  is  ordered  and  declared  by  this 
Court  and  the  authoritie  thereof,  that  henceforth  no  negroes  or  Indians, 
although  fervants  to  the  Englifh,  fhal  be  armed  or  permitted  to  trayne, 
and  y*  no  other  perfon  mall  be  exempted  from  trayning  but  fuch  as 
fome  law  doth  priviledge,  or  fome  of  the  county  courts  or  courts  of 
affiftants,  after  notice  of  the  partyes  defires,  to  the  officers  of  each 
company  to  which  they  belonge,  upon  juft  caufe,  fhal  difmifs." 

The  law,  as  printed  in  1 660,  required  "  every  perfon  above  the 
age  of  fixteen  years,"  to  "  duely  attend  all  Military  Exercife  and  fer- 
vice,"  with  certain  exceptions.  Neither  Indians,  Negroes,  or  Slaves 
are  among  thofe  exempted ;  but  it  is  reafonably  certain  that  they  were 
at  no  time  permitted  to  bear  arms  during  the  period  from  1656  down 
to  the  commencement  of  the  Revolution.  Gov.  Bradftreet,  in  May, 
1680,  expreflly  ftates,  in  anfwer  to  an  inquiry  from  the  Committee  for 
Trade  and  Plantations  as  to  the  number  of  men  able  to  bear  arms — 

"  We  account  all  generally  from  fixteen  to  fixty  that  are  healthfull 


244  Appendix. 

and  ftrong  bodys,  both  Houfholders  and  Servants  fit  to  bear  Armes, 
except  Negros  and  Slaves,  whom  wee  or  me  not"  M.  H.  S.  Coll., 
HI.,  viii.,  336. 

The  next  enaftment  on  the  fubjeft  was  in  the  brief  admmiftration 
of  Sir  Edmund  Andros.  The  Ad  for  fettling  the  militia,  enafted  by 
this  very  unpopular  Governor  and  his  Council  for  his  Majefty's  terri 
tory  and  dominion  of  New  England,  March  24,  1687,  provided  "  that 
no  perfon  whatfbever  above  fixteen  years  of  age  remain  unlifted  by 
themfelves,  matters,  miftrefles  or  employers."  Negroes  and  Indians 
are  not  exempted  by  any  provifion  of  this  aft ;  but  it  is  extremely 
doubtful  whether  it  ever  went  into  practical  operation.  One  of  the 
moft  obnoxious  of  his  meafures  was  his  attempt  to  control  the  militia 
in  New  England.  This  is,  however,  not  very  important ;  for  after  the 
Englifh  Revolution  and  the  eftablifhment  of  the  new  Province  charter, 
among  the  earlieft  of  the  laws  was  the  aft  for  regulating  the  militia — 
1693 — by  which  Indians  and  negroes  were  exempted  from  all  trainings. 
In  Sewall's  traft  againft  flavery  in  1 700  (ante,  p.  84),  he  fays,  "  As 
many  Negro  Men  as  there  are  among  us,  fo  many  empty  places  are 
there  in  our  Train  Bands."  A  later  publication  in  the  Bofton  News 
Letter,  June  loth,  1706,  mows  that  "Negroes  do  not  carry  Arms  to 
defend  the  Country  as  Whites  do,"  and  further,  that  they  could  not  be 
employed  as  fubftitutes  for  whites  who  were  impreffed  or  drafted, 
(ante,  p.  107,) 

A  fubfequent  aft  for  the  regulating  of  free  negroes,  &c., — 1 707 — 
illuft  rates  their  exaft  pofition  more  clearly.  The  recital  in  the  pre 
amble  is  that 

"  Whereas,  in  the  feveral  towns  and  precinfts  within  this  province, 
there  are  feveral  free  negroes,  and  mulattoes  able  of  body,  and  fit  for 
labor ;  who  are  not  charged  with  trainings,  watches,  and  other  fervices 
required  of  her  Majeftie's  fubjefts ;  whereof  they  have  mare  in  the 
benefit,"  &c. 

The  aft,  therefore,  provided  that  they  mould  do  fervice  equivalent 
to  trainings,  &c.,  each  able-bodied  free  negro  or  mulatto  fo  many  days* 
work  yearly  in  repairing  of  the  highways,  cleanfing  the  llreets,  or  other 
fervice  for  the  common  benefit  of  the  place.  See  ante,  pp.  60,  61. 

In  common  with  all  able  to  bear  arms,  they  were  required  to  make 
their  appearance  at  parade  in  cafes  of  ludden  alarms,  where  they  were 
to  attend  fuch  fervice  as  the  firft  commiffioned  officer  of  the  military 


Appendix.  245 

company  of  their  prccindl  fhould  direct,  during  the  time  the  company 
continued  in  arms.  This  obvioufly  points  to  menial  fervice,  or,  at  any 
rate,  a  fervice  different  from  that  of  the  enrolled  militia. 

This  ftate  of  things  continued  down  to  the  commencement  of  the 
war  of  the  Revolution,  and  the  firft  contemporary  adl  mows  that 
negroes  could  not  be  legally  enrolled  at  that  time.  The  general  militia 
aft  of  1775,  in  providing  for  the  enrolment,  excepts  "Negroes,  In 
dians,  and  mulattoes."  The  aft  of  May,  1776,  providing  for  a  rein 
forcement  to  the  American  army,  provides  that  "  Indians,  negroes,  and 
mulattoes,  mail  not  be  held  to  take  up  arms  or  procure  any  perfbn  to 
do  it  in  their  room."  The  aft  of  November  14,  1776,  to  provide 
reinforcements  to  the  American  army,  excepts  "  Negroes,  Indians,  and 
mulattoes,"  and  the  explanatory  refolve  parted  on  the  2pth  of  the  fame 
month  alfo  excepts  "Indians,  negroes,  mulattoes,  &c."  The  refolve  in 
the  fame  year  for  taking  the  number  of  all  male  inhabitants  above  fix- 
teen  years  of  age  excepts  "  Indians,  negroes,  and  mulattoes."  This 
cenfus  was  doubtlefs  taken  with  a  view  to  the  approaching  neceflity  for 
a  draft,  and  even  here  they  are  excluded,  although  they  were  apparently 
included  in  the  poll-lifts  at  the  fame  time — being  rateable  polls,  if  not 
free  citizens. 

It  was  only  when  the  preflure  of  the  terrible  reverfes  of  the  winter 
of  1 776-7  came  that  they  were  included  in  the  number  of  perfons 
liable  to  draft.  The  refolve,  January  6,  1777,  was  "for  raifing  every 
feventh  man  to  complete  our  quota,"  and  "  without  any  exceptions, 
fave  the  people  called  Quakers"— one  feventh  of  all  male  perfons  of 
fixteen  years  old  and  upwards.  A  refolve  in  Auguft  of  the  fame  year 
was  fimilar  in  its  objeft  and  character.  But  this  proceeding  was  not 
allowed  to  pafs  without  remonftrance,  not  by  the  negroes,  but  the 
white  men.  In  the  MafTachufetts  Legiflature,  March  5,  1778,  a  petition 
of  Benjamin  Goddard  in  behalf  of  the  feleftmen,  committee  of  fafety, 
and  militia  officers  of  the  town  of  Grafton,  praying  that  they  may  be 
excufed  from  raifing  a  feventh  part  of  the  blacks  in  faid  town,  they 
being  exempt  from  military  duty  and  free  occupants  on  their  own 
eftate,  was  read,  and  the  petitioner  had  leave  to  withdraw  his  petition. 
During  the  remainder  of  the  war  the  law  appears  to  have  regarded 
as  liable  to  military  duty  "  any  perfon  living  or  refiding  in  any  town 
or  plantation  within  this  State  the  term  of  three  months  together  ;"  but 
at  the  fame  time,  although  they  had  the  benefit  of  the  example  of 


246  Appendix. 

Rhode  Ifland  in  the  organization  of  their  famous  regiment  of  negro 
{laves,  an  attempt  in  Maflachufetts  to  authorize  the  formation  of  a 
fimilar  corps  "  does  not  appear  to  have  been  deemed  advifable  at  the 
time." 

The  war  came  to  an  end,  and,  foon  after,  the  very  firft  general 
militia  aft,  pafled  March  10,  1785,  revived  the  old  feature,  and  con 
tinued  the  exemption  of  "  negroes,  Indians,  and  mulattoes  "  from  both 
train-band  and  alarm-lift.  In  the  time  of  the  infurreftion  in  1786, 
negroes  offered  their  fervices  to  Governor  Bowdoin,  to  go  againft  the 
infurgents,  to  the  number  of  feven  hundred ;  but  the  Council  did  not 
advife  fending  them. 

The  fubftance  of  the  next  law  is  the  fame,  although  they  changed 
the  "  way  of  putting  it  "  by  adopting  the  language  of  the  United  States 
law.  in  which  negroes  do  not  appear  among  the  exempts,  but  are  ex 
cluded  in  the  enrolment. 

The  militia  law  of  June  22,  1793,  authorizes  the  enrolment  of 
"  each  and  every  free,  able-bodied  white  male  citizen  of  this,  or  any 
other  of  the  United  States,  refiding  within  this  Commonwealth," 
between  the  ages  of  eighteen  and  forty-five  yearsy  fave  as  excepted. 

This  exclulion  from  military  employment,  and  the  privilege  of 
bearing  arms,  continued  apparently  without  change  until  the  year  1863, 
when,  by  Chapter  193  of  the  A6b  of  that  year,  approved  April  27, 
1 863,  the  Maflachufetts  laws  were  made  to  conform  to  thofe  of  the 
United  States,  which  had  already  recognized  and  accepted  the  negro  as 
a  foldier. 

B.   ADDITIONAL  NOTES,  ETC. 

i.  Page  21.  On  the  9th  of  November,  1716,  P.M.,  was  prefented 
to  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  of  Maflachufetts  "  a  Petition  of  Wil 
liam  Brown,  fon  of  a  Freeman,  by  a  Servant  Woman,  and  has  been 
fold  as  a  flave,  and  is  at  prefent  owned  by  Mr.  Andrew  Eoardman, 
mowing  that  his  faid  Mafter  will  fet  him  at  liberty,  and  make  him  Free, 
if  this  Court  will  indemnify  him  from  the  Law  relating  to  the  Manu- 
miflion  of  Negroes,  as  to  maintaining  of  him  in  cafe  of  Age,  Difability 
etc.,  Praying  the  Court  to  indemnify  him." 

On  the  following  day,  this  Petition  was  "  further  confidered,  and 
the  following  Vote  pafled  thereon,  viz. :  Inafmuch  as  the  Petitioner  is 
a  young  able-bodied  Man,  and  it  cannot  be  fuppofed,  that  he  is  Manu- 


Appendix.  247 

mitted,  by  his  Mafter,  to  avoid  charge  in  fupporting  him,  Ordered^ 
that  the  Prayer  of  the  Petitioner  be  Granted.  And  that  the  Petitioner 
be  deemed  Free,  when  fet  at  liberty  by  his  Mafter,  although  no  fecurity 
be  given  to  indemnify  the  Town  where  he  dwells  from  charge  by  him, 
and  in  cafe  the  Petitioner  mail  hereafter  want  Support,  his  faid  Mafter 
mail  not  be  obliged  to  be  at  the  charge  thereof,  any  Law,  Ufage,  or 
Cuftom  to  the  contrary  notwithftanding."  This  order  was  fent  up  for 
concurrence,  concurred  in  and  confented  to  by  the  Governor  on  the 
fame  day,  November  loth,  1716.  Journal  H.  of  R.j  p.  36.  General 
Court  Records,  x.,  p.  108. 

2.  Page  51.  Maflachufetts  has  enjoyed  the  diftinclion  of  appearing 
in  the  firft  Cenfus  of  the  United  States  without  any  flaves  among  her 
population. 

"  The  following  anecdote  connected  with  this  fubjecl,  it  is  believed, 
has  never  been  made  public.  In  1 790  a  cenfus  was  ordered  by  the 
General  Government  then  newly  eftablilhed,  and  the  Marfhal  of  the 
Maflachufetts  diftrift  had  the  care  of  making  the  furvey.  When  he 
inquired  forjlaves,  moft  people  anfwered  none  :  if  any  one  faid  that 
he  had  one,  the  marfhal  would  afk  him  if  he  meant  to  be  fingular,  and 
would  tell  him  that  na  other  perfon  had  given  in  any.  The  anfwer 
then  was,  "  If  none  are  given  in,  I  will  not  be  fingular  ;"  and  thus  the 
lift  was  completed  without  any  number  in  the  column  for  flaves."  Life, 
of  Belknap,  pp.  164-5. 

Dr.  Belknap's  own  account  of  this  cenfus,  written  and  publifhed  in 
1795,  is  as  follows: 

"In  1790,  a  cenfus  of  the  United  States  was  made  by  order  of  the 
federal  government ;  the  fchedule  fent  out  on  that  occaflon  contained 
three  columns  for  free  whites  of  feveral  defcriptions,  which,  in  the 
State  of  Maflachufetts  and  diftricl  of  Maine,  amounted  to  469,326;  a 
fourth  for  "  all  other  free  perfons,"  and  a  fifth  for  "  flaves."  There 
being  none  put  into  the  laft  column,  it  became  neceflary  to  put  the 
blacks,  with  the  Indians,  into  the  fourth  column,  and  the  amount  was 
6001.  Of  this  number,  I  fuppofe  the  blacks  were  upwards  of  4000; 
and  of  the  remaining  2000,  many  were  a  mixed  breed,  between  Indians 
and  blacks  .  ...  In  the  fame  cenfus,  as  hath  been  before  obferved, 
no  flaves  are  fet  down  to  Maflachufetts.  This  return,  made  by  the 
marfhal  of  the  diftrift,  may  be  confidered  as  the  formal  evidence  of  the 
abolition  ofjlavery  in  MafTachufetts,  efpecially  as  no  perfon  has  ap- 


248  Appendix. 

peared  to  conteft  the  legality  of  the  return."     M.  H.  S.  Coll.,  i.,  iv., 
199,  204. 

3.  Page  53.  In  1718,  a  committee  of  both  Houfes  prepared  a  bill 
entitled  "  An  Aft  for  the  Encouraging  the  Importation  of  White  Male 
Servants,  and  the  preventing  the  Clandeftine  bringing  in  of  Negroes 
and  Molattoes."     It  was  read  in  Council  a  firft  time  on  the  i6th  of 
June,  and    "  fent  down  recommended  "    to  the  Houfe,  where  it  was 
alfo  read  a  firft  time  on  the  fame  day.     The  next  day  it  was  read  a 
fecond  time,  and  "  on  the  queftion  for  a  third  reading,  decided  in  the 
negative."     Journal  H.  of  R.,  15,  16.     General  Court  Records,  x., 
282. 

4.  Pages  54,  90.  The  Aft  of  1705,  Chapter  6,  underwent  fome 
changes  in  the  Council,  after  it  had  pafled  in  the  Houfe.     It  was  read 
in  Council  on  Monday  the  3d  of  December,  1705,  a  firft  time,  "as 
paff'd  in  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives."     The  next  day  it  was  read  a 
fecond  and  third  time  "  with  fome  Amendments  and  Additions  agreed 
to."    On  the  5th  it  was  "Read  and  Voted  to  be  pafled  into  an  Aft." 
General  Court  Records,  vin.,  187,  188,  190. 

5.  Page  61.    A  draft  of  Governor  Dudley 's  letter  "concerning 
Indian  Captives  from  Carolina,"  was  prefented  and  approved  in  the 
Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  on  the  I5th  of  June,  1715.     Journal,  28. 

6.  Page  65.    A  recent  examination  of  the  collection  of  Tax-Afts 
in  the  pofleffion  of  Ellis  Ames,  Efq.,  of  Canton,  Maflachufetts,  enables 
us  to  add  that  Indian,  Negro,  and  Mulatto  fervants  were  eftimated  pro-' 
portionably  as  other  perfonal  eftate,  according  to  the  found  judgment' 
and  difcretion  of  the  Afleflbrs  in  each  and  every  year  from   1727  to 
1775,  excepting  1730,  1731,  1749,  1750.     The  afts  for  thefe  years 
we  have  not  feen,  but  it  is  reafonably  certain  that  the  provifion  was  the 
fame  as  in  all  the  others.     That  of  1776  was  probably  fimilar  to  that 
of  1777,  in  which  the  Poll-Tax  is  levied  on  Male  Polls  above  16  years 
of  age,  including  Negroes  and  Mulattoes,  and  fuch  of  them  that  are 
under  the  government  of  a  Mafter  or  Miftrefs,  to  be  taxed  to  the  faid 
Mafter  or  Miftrefs  refpeftively,  in   the  fame  manner  as  Minors  and 
Apprentices  are  taxed.     This  method  continued  to  1791.     The  aft  of 
1793  omits  the  mention  of  Negroes  and  Mulattoes,  taxing  "  minors, 
apprentices  and  fervants  "  as  above.     In  1803,  fuch  as  are  under  "  the 
immediate  government"  of  a  mafter,  etc.     In  1805,  the  fervants  are 
omitted,  and  there  is  a  feparate  feftion  concerning  minors. 


Appendix.  249 

/.  Page  94,  and  note.  With  reference  to  the  flave's  "  right  to  Re 
ligion,"  we  fhould  have  added  a  word  refpefting  the  peculiar  "  fepara- 
tion  "  of  the  religious  people  of  Maflachufetts  and  their  well-known 
"  fear  of  polluting  the  ordinances ;"  to  which  was  afcribed,  in  this 
very  connection,  that  neglect  of  "  proper  means  to  make  men  godly," 
which  became  "  the  mifery  of  New  England."  Stoddard^s  Anfwer  to 
fome  Cafes  of  Confcience,  etc.,  1722,  p.  12.  It  was  the  opinion  of  this 
writer  that  "  if  they  (fervants)  had  proper  Helps,  they  might  be  as 
forward  in  Religion,  as  the  Engtijfh"  Ibid. 

8.  Pages  97,  101.  Inftruftions  fimilar  to  thofe  given  to  Andros  in 
1688  (ante,  pp.  51-2,  96)  were  repeated  to  fubfequent  governors  of 
the  various  colonies.  We  have  found  no  act  pafled  in  accordance  with 
thefe  inftru&ions  in  Maflachufetts,  or  any  other  colony  or  province 
excepting  New  Hampfhire ;  where  fuch  a  law  was  enacted,  in  which 
the  diftindlion  noted  in  the  text  between  the  Chriftian  fervants  or 
flaves,  and  the  Indians  and  Negroes,  is  emphatically  illuftrated.  The 
Province  Law  of  1718,  Chap.  70,  is  as  follows  (Edit.  1771,  p*  101)  : 

An  Ad  for  retraining  Inhuman  Severities. 

§  I.  BE  IT  ENACTED  by  His  EXCELLENCY  the  GOVERNOR,  COUNCIL, 
and  REPRESENTATIVES,  convened  in  GENERAL  ASSEMBLY,  and  it  is  here 
by  ENACTED  by  the  AUTHORITY  of  the  fame ,  That  for  the  prevention 
and  reflraining  inhuman  feverities,  which  by  evil  mafters  or  overfeers 
may  be  ufed  towards  their  Chriftian  fervants,  that  from  and  after  the 
publication  hereof,  if  any  man  frriite  out  the  eye  or  tooth  of  his  man- 
fervant  or  maid-fervant,  or  otherwife  maim  or  disfigure  them  much, 
unlefs  it  be  by  meer  cafualty,  he  mall  let  him  or  her  go  free  from  his 
fervice,  and  mail  allow  fuch  further  recompence  as  the  court  of  quarter 
feflions  (hall  adjudge  him. 

§  2.  AND  IT  is  further  ENACTED,  and  ORDAINED  by  the  AUTHORITY 
aforejaid.  That  if  any  perfon  or  perfons  whatever  within  this  province 
mail  wilfully  kill  his  Indian  or  negro  fervant  or  fervants,  he  mail  be 
punifhed  with  death. 

It  is  true,  that  Chriftian  fervants  were  protected  in  Maflachufetts 
by  the  carlieft  law  refpecVmg  the  "  liberties  of  fervants  "  from  which  the 
provifions  of  the  firft  feftion  of  the  foregoing  law  were  copied ;  but 
the  relations  of  the  Indian  and  Negro  flaves  and  their  mafters  were  ftill 


250  Appendix. 

regulated  in  accordance  with  the  contemporary  ftandards  of  opinion 
concerning  what  was  morally  required  by  "  the  law  of  God  eftablifhed  in 
Ifrael,"  or  what  may  be  defcribed  as  the  New-Englifh-Hebrew-Chriftian 
common  or  cuftomary  law.  The  familiar  phrafe — "  treated  worfe  than 
a  ne^ro  " — is  hiftorical  in  MaflTachufetts.  Sewall's  Diary,  Ottober  zotki 
1701,  quoted  in  Ouincy's  Harv.  Coll.,  i.,  490. 

9.  Pages  126-28.  On  the  25th  of  June,  1766,  a  petition  was  pre- 
fented  in  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives,  from  Ezekiel  Wood,  the  repre- 
fentative  for  the  town  of  Uxbridge,  fetting  forth  that  there  were  in  faid 
town  two  aged  and  infirm  negroes  not  belonging  there,  etc.  On  the 
28th,  this  petition  was  difmifled,  and  a  Committee  was  appointed  to 
bring  in  a  bill  at  the  next  feflion  for  preventing  Fraud  in  the  fale  of 
Negroes.  On  the  ift  of  November,  in  the  fame  year,  "  a  Bill  intitu 
led  An  A61  to  prevent  Frauds  in  the  fale  of  Negroes  "  was  "  read  a  firft 
time  and  ordered  a  fecond  reading  on  Tuefday  next  at  Ten  o'clock." 
On  the  4th,  it  was  read  a  fecond  time  and  recommitted  for  amendment. 

The  draft  of  the  bill  is  preferved,  as  well  as  the  report  of  the  com 
mittee.  Mafs.  Archives,  Dome/lie  Relations,  1643-1774,  ^.9,449, 
450.  It  was  intended  to  prevent  fraudulent  fales  made  by  the  original 
purchafers  or  owners  to  perfons  of  no  refponfibility.  Under  its  pro- 
vifions,  the  towns  were  authorized  to  bring  actions  againft  the  next 
vendor  of  ability,  and  each  and  every  vendor  from  the  original  pur- 
chafer  or  owner  was  made  liable.  In  this  way  the  maintenance  of  the 
pauper  negroes  was  to  be  provided  for  without  charge  to  the  towns. 

We  find  no  further  proceedings  on  the  fubjeft  until  the  4th  of 
June,  1 767,  when  the  "  Bill  to  prevent  Fraud  in  the  fale  of  Negroes 
and  to  provide  for  their  maintenance  "  was  read,  and  the  Secretary  was 
ordered  to  "  lay  on  the  Table  the  Aft  for  laying  a  duty  of  Import  on 
the  Importation  of  Negro  or  other  Slaves  into  this  Province,"  which 
he  accordingly  did.  The  latter  bill,  as  we  have  feen,  had  fallen  between 
the  two  houfes  in  March  previous.  Whether  it  was  propofed,  at  this 
time,  by  bringing  them  together  to  devife  fome  new  movement  on 
the  fubjeft  of  either  or  both,  we  cannot  afcertain,  having  found  no 
trace  of  further  aftion  upon  them. 


Appendix.  251 

C.   JUDGE  BAFFIN'S  REPLY  TO  JUDGE  SEWALL,  1701. 

WHILE  thefe  meets  are  paffing  through  the  prefs,  we  are  kindly 
favored  with  the  opportunity  to  make  ufe  of  this  extremely  rare  and 
valuable,  if  not  unique  tract,  from  which  we  copy  below.  We  are 
indebted  to  the  generous  and  liberal  courtefy  of  GEORGE  BRINLEY, 
Efq.,  of  Hartford,  Connecticut,  for  this  moft  interefting  and  import 
ant  addition  to  our  work.  Compare  ante,  pp.  83-88. 

"  A   Brief  and  Candid  Anfwer  to  a  late  Printed 
Sheet,  Entituled,  The  Selling  of  Jofeph. 

"  THAT  Honourable  and  Learned  Gentleman,  the  Author  of  a 
Sheet,  Entituled,  The  Selling  of  Jofeph,  A  Memorial,  feems  from 
thence  to  draw  this  conclufion,  that  becaufe  the  Sons  of  Jacob  did 
very  ill  in  felling  their  Brother  Jofeph  to  the  I/hmaelites,  who  were 
Heathens,  therefore  it  is  utterly  unlawful  to  Buy  and  Sell  Negroes, 
though  among  Chriftians;  which  Conclufion  I  prefume  is  not  well 
drawn  from  the  Premifes,  nor  is  the  cafe  parallel ;  for  it  was  unlawful 
for  the  Israelites  to  Sell  their  Brethren  upon  any  account,  or  pretence 
whatfoever  during  life.  But  it  was  not  unlawful  for  the  Seed  of  Abra 
ham  to  have  Bond  men,  and  Bond  women  either  born  in  their  Houfe, 
or  bought  with  their  Money,  as  it  is  written  of  Abraham,  Gen.  14. 
14.  &?  21.  10.  6?  Exod.  21.  1 6.  ££  Levit.  25.  44.  45,  46  v.  After  the 
giving  of  the  Law :  And  in  Jojh.  9.  23.  That  famous  Example  of 
the  Gibeomtes  is  a  fufficient  proof  where  there  no  other. 

"  To  fpeak  a  little  to  the  Gentlemans  firft  Aflertion :  That  none 
ought  to  part  with  their  Liberty  themfelves,  or  deprive  others  of  it 
but  upon  mature  con/ideration ;  a  prudent  exception,  in  which  he 
grants,  that  upon  fome  confideration  a  man  may  be  deprived  of  his 
Liberty.  And  then  prefently  in  his  next  Pofition  or  Aflertion  he 
denies  it,  viz. :  It  is  moft  certain,  that  all  men  as  they  are  the  Sons 
of  Adam  are.  Coheirs,  and,  have  equal  right  to  Liberty,  and  all  other 
Comforts  of  Life,  which  he  would  prove  out  of  Psal.  115.  16. 
The  Earth  hath  he  given  to  the  Children  of  Men.  True,  but  what 
is  all  this  to  the  purpofe,  to  prove  that  all  men  have  equal  right  to 
Liberty,  and  all  outward  comforts  of  this  life ;  which  Pofition  feems 


252  Appendix. 

to  invert  the  Order  that  God  hath  fet  in  the  World,  who  hath 
Ordained  different  degrees  and  orders  of  men,  fome  to  be  High  and 
Honourable,  fbme  to  be  Low  and  Defpicable  ;  fome  to  be  Monarchs, 
Kings,  Princes  and  Governours,  Mafters  and  Commanders,  others  to 
be  Subjects,  and  to  be  Commanded;  Servants  of  fundry  forts  and 
degrees,  bound  to  obey  ;  yea,  fome  to  be  born  Slaves,  and  so  to  re 
main  during  their  lives,  as  hath  been  proved.  Otherwife  there  would 
be  a  meer  parity  among  men,  contrary  to  that  of  the  Apoftle,  I  Cor. 
1 2  from  the  1 3  to  the  26  verse,  where  he  fets  forth  (by  way  of  com- 
parifon)  the  different  forts  and  offices  of  the  Members  of  the  Body,  in- 
digitating  that  they  are  all  of  ufe,  but  not  equal,  and  of  like  dignity. 
So  God  hath  fet  different  Orders  and  Degrees  of  Men  in  the  World, 
both  in  Church  and  Common  weal.  Now,  if  this  Pofition  of  parity 
mould  be  true,  it  would  then  follow  that  the  ordinary  Courfe  of  Divine 
Providence  of  God  in  the  World  mould  be  wrong,  and  unjuft,  (which 
we  muft  not  dare  to  think,  much  lefs  to  affirm)  and  all  the  facred  Rules, 
Precepts  and  Commands  of  the  Almighty  which  he  hath  given  the  Son 
of  Men  to  obferve  and  keep  in  their  refpe&ive  Places,  Orders  and 
Degrees,  would  be  to  no  purpofe ;  which  unaccountably  derogate  from 
the  Divine  Wifdom  of  the  moft  High,  who  hath  made  nothing  in  vain, 
but  hath  Holy  Ends  in  all  his  Difpenfations  to  the  Children  of  men. 

"In  the  next  place,  this  worthy  Gentleman  makes  a  large  Difcourfe 
concerning  the  Utility  and  Conveniency  to  keep  the  one,  and  incon- 
veniency  of  the  other;  refpedling  white  and  black  Servants,  which 
conduceth  moft  to  the  welfare  and  benefit  of  this  Province  :  which  he 
concludes  to  be  white  men,  who  are  in  many  refpefts  to  be  preferred 
before  Blacks ;  who  doubts  that  ?  doth  it  therefore  follow,  that  it  is 
altogether  unlawful  for  Chriflians  to  buy  and  keep  Negro  Servants  (for 
this  is  the  Thefis)  but  that  thofe  that  have  them  ought  in  Confcience 
to  fet  them  free,  and  fo  lofe  all  the  money  they  coft  (for  we  muft  not 
live  in  any  known  fin)  this  feems  to  be  his  opinion ;  but  it  is  a  Ques 
tion  whether  it  ever  was  the  Gentleman's  practice  ?  But  if  he  could 
perfwade  the  General  Aflembly  to  make  an  Aft,  That  all  that  have 
Negroes,  and  do  fet  them  free,  mail  be  Re  imburfed  out  of  the  Publick 
Treafury,  and  that  there  mail  be  no  more  Negroes  brought  into  the 
Country ;  'tis  probable  there  would  be  more  of  his  opinion ;  yet  he 
would  find  it  a  hard  tafk  to  bring  the  Country  to  confent  thereto ;  for 


Appendix.  253 

then  the  Negroes  muft  be  all  fent  out  of  the  Country,  or  elfe  the 
remedy  would  be  worfe  than  the  Difeafe ;  and  it  is  to  be  feared  that 
thofe  Negroes  that  are  free,  if  there  be  not  fome  ftricl  courfe  taken  with 
them  by  Authority,  they  will  be  a  plague  to  this  Country. 

"  Again,  If  it  mould  be  unlawful  to  deprive  them  that  are  lawful 
Captives,  or  Bondmen  of  their  Liberty  for  Life  being  Heathens ;  it 
feems  to  be  more  unlawful  to  deprive  our  Brethren,  of  our  own  or 
other  Chriftian  Nations  of  the  Liberty,  (though  but  for  a  time)  by 
binding  them  to  Serve  fome  Seven,  Ten,  Fifteen,  and  fome  Twenty 
Years,  which  oft  times  proves  for  their  whole  Life,  as  many  have  been ; 
which  in  effecl:  is  the  fame  in  Nature,  though  different  in  the  time,  yet 
this  was  allow'd  among  the  Jews  by  the  Law  of  God  ;  and  is  the 
conftant  practice  of  our  own  and  other  Chriftian  Nations  in  the  World  : 
the  which  our  Author  by  his  Dogmatical  AfTertions  doth  condemn  as 
Irreligious ;  which  is  Diametrically  contrary  to  the  Rules  and  Precepts 
which  God  hath  given  the  diverfity  of  men  to  obferve  in  their  refpec- 
tive  Stations,  Callings,  and  Conditions  of  Life,  as  hath  been  obferved. 

"  And  to  illuftrate  his  Aflertion  our  Author  brings  in  by  way  of 
Comparifon  the  Law  of  God  againft  man  Stealing,  on  pain  of  Death  : 
Intimating  thereby,  that  Buying  and  Selling  of  Negro's  is  a  breach  of 
that  Law,  and  fo  deferves  Death :  A  fevere  Sentence  :  But  herein  he 
begs  the  Queftion  with  a  Caveat  Emptor.  For,  in  that  very  Chapter 
there  is  a  Difpenfation  to  the  People  of  Israel,  to  have  Bond  men, 
Women  and  Children,  even  of  their  own  Nation  in  fome  cafe ;  and 
Rules  given  therein  to  be  obferved  concerning  them ;  Verfe  the  ^th. 
And  in  the  before  cited  place,  Levit.  25.  44,  45,  46.  Though  the 
Israelites  were  forbidden  (ordinarily)  to  make  Bond  men  and  Women 
of  their  own  Nation,  but  of  Strangers  they  might :  the  words  run  thus, 
verse  44.  Both  thy  Bond  men,  and  thy  Bond  maids  which  thou  Jhalt 
have  Jliall  be  of  the  Heathen,  that  are  round  about  you  :  of  them 
JJiall  you  Buy  Bond  men  and  Bond  maids,  &c.  See  also,  i  Cor.  12. 
13.  Whether  we  be  Bond  or  Free,  which  mows  that  in  the  times  of 
the  New  Teftament,  there  were  Bond  men  alfo,  &c. 

"  In  fine,  The  fum  of  this  long  Haurange,  is  no  other,  than  to  com 
pare  the  Buying  and  Selling  of  Negro's  unto  the  Stealing  of  Men,  and  the 
Selling  of  Jofeph  by  his  Brethren,  which  bears  no  proportion  therewith, 
nor  is  there  any  congruiety  therein,  as  appears  by  the  foregoing  Texts. 


254  Appendix. 

"  Our  Author  doth  further  proceed  to  anfwer  fome  Obje&ions  of 
his  own  framing,  which  he  fuppofes  fome  might  raife. 

"Obj  eft.  i.  That  thefe  Blackamores  are  of  the  Posterity  of 
Cham,  and  therefore  under  the  Curfeof  Slavery.  Gen.  9.  25,  26,  27. 
The  which  the  Gentleman  feems  to  deny,  faying,  they  ware  the  Seed 
of  Canaan  that  were  Curfed,  &c. 

"  Anjw.  Whether  they  were  fo  or  not,  we  mall  not  difpute  :  this 
may  fuffice,  that  not  only  the  feed  of  Cham  or  Canaan,  but  any  lawful 
Captives  of  other  Heathen  Nations  may  be  made  Bond  men  as  hath 
been  proved. 

"  Obj,  2.  That  the  Negroes  are  brought  out  of  Pagan  Countreys 
into  places  where  the  Gofpel  is  Preached.  To  which  he  Replies,  that 
we  mujl  not  doe  Evil  that  Good  may  come  of  it. 

"  Anf.  To  which  we  anfwer,  That  it  is  no  Evil  thing  to  bring 
them  out  of  their  own  Heathenish  Country,  where  they  may  have  the 
Knowledge  of  the  True  God,  be  Converted  and  Eternally  faved. 

"  Obj.  3.  The  AfFricans  have  Wars  one  with  another ;  our  Ships 
bring  lawful  Captives  taken  in  thofe  Wars. 

"  To  which  our  Author  anfwers  Conjefturally,  and  Doubtfully,  for 
ought  we  know,  that  which  may  or  may  not  be ;  which  is  infignificant, 
and  proves  nothing.  He  alfo  compares  the  Negroes  Wars,  one  Nation 
with  another,  with  the  Wars  between  Jofeph  and  his  Brethren.  But 
where  doth  he  read  of  any  fuch  War  ?  We  read  indeed  of  a 
Domeftick  Quarrel  they  had  with  him,  they  envyed  and  hated  Jofeph  ; 
but  by  what  is  Recorded,  he  was  meerly  paffive  and  meek  as  a  Lamb. 
This  Gentleman  farther  adds,  That  there  is  not  any  War  but  is 
unjiifl  on  one  fide,  &c.  Be  it  fo,  what  doth  that  fignify  :  We  read  of 
lawful  Captives  taken  in  the  Wars,  and  lawful  to  be  Bought  and  Sold 
without  contracting  the  guilt  of  the  Agrejfors ;  for  which  we  have  the 
example  of  Abraham  before  quoted ;  but  if  we  muft  ftay  while  both 
parties  Warring  are  in  the  right,  there  would  be  no  lawful  Captives  at 
all  to  be  Bought ;  which  feems  to  be  rediculous  to  imagine,  and  contrary 
to  the  tenour  of  Scripture,  and  all  Humane  Hiftories  on  that  fubjecl:. 

"Obj.  4.  Abraham  had  Servants  bought  with  his  Money,  and 
born  in  his  Houfe.  Gen.  14.  14.  To  which  our  worthy  Author 
anfwers,  until  the  Circumftances  of  Abraham's  pur  chafe  be  recorded, 
no  Argument  can  be  drawn  from  it. 


Appendix.  255 

"  AnJ.  To  which  we  Reply,  this  is  alfo  Dogmatical,  and  proves 
nothing.  He  farther  adds,  In  the  mean  time  Charity  Obliges  us  to 
conclude,  that  he  knew  it  was  lawful  and  good.  Here  the  gentleman 
yields  the  cafe ;  for  if  we  are  in  Charity  bound  to  believe  Abrahams 
practice,  in  buying  and  keeping  Slaves  in  his  houfe  to  be  lawful  and 
good  :  then  it  follows,  that  our  Imitation  of  him  in  this  his  Moral 
Action,  is  as  warrantable  as  that  of  his  Faith  ;  who  is  the  Father  of 
all  them  that  believe.  Rom.  4.  1 6. 

"  In  the  clofe  of  all,  Our  Author  Quotes  two  more  places  of  Scrip 
ture,  viz. ;  Levit.  25.  46,  and  Jer.  34,  from  the  8.  to  the  22.  v. 
To  prove  that  the  people  of  Ifrael  were  ftridly  forbidden  the  Buying 
and  Selling  one  another  for  Slaves  :  who  queftions  that  ?  and  what  is 
that  to  the  cafe  in  hand  ?  What  a  ftrange  piece  of  Logick  is  this  ? 
Tis  unlawful  for  Chriflians  to  Buy  and  Sell  one  another  for  flaves. 
Ergo,  It  is  unlawful  to  Buy  and  Sell  Negroes  that  are  lawful  CaptivM 
Heathens. 

"  And  after  a  Serious  Exhortation  to  us  all  to  Love  one  another 
according  to  the  Command  of  Christ.  Math.  5,  43,  44.  This 
worthy  Gentleman  concludes  with  this  Aflertion,  That  thefe  Ethiope- 
ans  as  Black  as  they  are,  feeing  they  are  the  Sons  and  Daughters 
of  the  firft  Adam;  the  Brethren  and  Sifters  of  the  Second  Adam, 
and  the  Offspring  of  God ;  we  ought  to  treat  them  with  a  refpetl 
agreeable. 

"  Ans.  We  grant  it  for  a  certain  and  undeniable  verity,  That  all 
Mankind  are  the  Sons  and  Daughters  of  Adam-)  and  the  Creatures  of 
God :  But  it  doth  not  therefore  follow  that  we  are  bound  to  love 
and  refpecl  all  men  alike ;  this  under  favour  we  mud  take  leave  to 
deny ;  we  ought  in  charity,  if  we  fee  our  Neighbour  in  want,  to  re 
lieve  them  in  a  regular  way,  but  we  are  not  bound  to  give  them  fo 
much  of  our  Eftates,  as  to  make  them  equal  with  our  felves,  because 
they  are  our  Brethren,  the  Sons  of  Adam,  no,  not  our  own  natural 
Kinfmen :  We  are  Exhorted  to  do  good  unto  all,  but  efpecially  to 
them  who  are  of  the  Houjhold  of  Faith,  Gal.  6.  10.  And  we  are 
to  love,  honour  and  refpeft  all  men  according  to  the  gift  of  God  that 
is  in  them  :  I  may  love  my  Servant  well,  but  my  Son  better;  Charity 
begins  at  home,  it  would  be  a  violation  of  common  prudence,  and  a 
breach  of  good  manners,  to  treat  a  Prince  like  a  Peafant.  And  this 


256  Appendix. 

worthy  Gentleman  would  deem  himfelf  much  negle&ed,  if  we  mould 
mow  him  no  more  Defference  than  to  an  ordinary  Porter  :  And  there 
fore  thefe  florid  expreflions,  the  Sons  and  Daughters  of  the  Firft  Adam, 
the  Brethren  and  Sifters  of  the  Second  Adam,  and  the  Offspring  of 
God,  feem  to  be  mifapplied  to  import  and  infmuate,  that  we  ought  to 
tender  Pagan  Negroes  with  all  love,  kindnefs,  and  equal  refpect  as  to 
the  beft  of  men. 

"  By  all  which  it  doth  evidently  appear  both  by  Scripture  and 
Reafon,  the  practice  of  the  People  of  God  in  all  Ages,  both  before 
and  after  the  giving  of  the  Law,  and  in  the  times  of  the  Gofpel,  that 
there  were  Bond  men,  Women  and  Children  commonly  kept  by  holy 
and  good  men,  and  improved  in  Service ;  and  therefore  by  the  Com 
mand  of  God,  Lev.  25,  44,  and  their  venerable  Example,  we  may 
keep  Bond  men,  and  ufe  them  in  our  Service  ftill ;  yet  with  all  can 
dour,  moderation  and  Chriftian  prudence,  according  to  their  ftate  and 
condition  confonant  to  the  Word  of  God. 

"  The  Negroes  Character. 

"  Cowardly  and  cruel  are  thofe  Blacks  Innate, 
Prone  to  Revenge,  Imp  of  inveterate  hate. 
He  that  exafperates  themtfoon  efpies 
Mischief  and  Murder  in  their  very  eyes. 
Libidinous,  Deceitful,  Falfe  and  Rude, 
Thejpume  IJJue  of  Ingratitude. 
The  Premifes  confided d,  all  may  tell, 
How  near  good  Jofeph  they  are  parallel" 


'  V   OF  THE 

|  UNIVERSITY 


By  the  same  Writer : 

THE    TREASON     OF    LEE. 

"Mr.  Lee's  Plan— March  29,  1777."  The  Treafon  of 
Charles  Lee,  Major-General,  Second  in  Command  in  the 
American  Army  of  the  Revolution.  By  GEORGE  H. 
MOORE,  Librarian  of  the  New  York  Hiftorical  Society. 
i  vol.,  8vo,  cloth.  Two  Steel  Portraits,  and  Two  Litho 
graph  Fac-fimiles  of  Documents.  Three  dollars. 

"  It  is  a  clear  and  most  interesting  development  of  one  of  the  strangest  events 
in  the  history  of  the  Revolution.  It  is  as  important  as  it  is  curious,  for  the  acts  and 
motives  of  a  man  who  held  so  high  a  rank  in  the  army  and  in  the  public  estimation 
should  be  known.  They  affect  the  character  of  others,  and  throw  light  on  transac 
tions  which  could  not  otherwise  be  explained." 

JARED   SPARKS. 

11  Your  paper  was  certainly  the  most  instructive  one  ever  presented  (within  my 
observation)  to  any  one  of  our  Historical  Societies. 

"  The  work  does  you  great  credit ;  it  is  full  of  interest,  of  facts  collected  from 
far  and  near.  The  story  is  well  told,  the  criticism  careful  and  discriminating.  I 
feel  certain  it  will  bring  you  much  reputation  for  its  completeness  and  manner  of  exe 
cution.  '  '  Go  on  ;  and  you  will  win  honor  for  yourself,  while  you  will  as 
sist  to  make  American  History  what  it  ought  to  be." 

GEORGE   BANCROFT. 

"  I  have  read  it  with  great  interest.  It  is  a  curious,  valuable,  and  conclusively 
argued  contribution  to  our  Revolutionary  history." 

GULIAN  C.  VERPLANCK. 

"  I  am  greatly  indebted  to  you  for  a  copy  of  your  beautiful  monograph.  *  *  * 
I  rejoice  that  you  have  found  the  means  (and  made  such  good  use  of  them)  of  put 
ting  his  worthlessness  beyond  all  question." 

EDWARD  EVERETT. 

"  You  have  done  a  good  service  to  history.  I  ran  it  through  with  the  greatest 
interest." 

ROBERT  C.  WINTHROP. 

"  Many  thanks  for  <  Lee's  Treason.'  *  *  *  Moore  has  made  out  the 
case  against  him." 

W.  F.  DE  SAUSSURE  (of  S.  C.) 

"  The  Treason  of  Lee  is  placed  beyond  doubt,  and  the  original  documents  estab 
lishing  it  are   published  in  the  recent  highly  valuable  monograph  of  G.  H.  Moore 
Esq.,  on  that  subject." — Everett's  Life  of  Washington. 


(2) 

"  We  commend  Mr.  Moore's  work  as  the  most  valuable,  contribution  to  our 
Revolutionary  history  that  has  appeared  for  many  a  day,  and  assure  our  readers  that 
the  perusal  of  its  elegant  and  eloquent  pages  cannot  but  repay  the  few  hours  that  it 
will  require." — Historical  Magazine. 

"  We  commend  this  essay  to  the  attention  of  historical  students,  admiring  the 
simplicity  and  lucidity  of  its  style." — Express. 

"  A  work  which  we  have  read  with  great  pleasure,  *  *  *  wen  ^^^  t]le 

attention  of  our  readers,  and  we  take  great  pleasure  in  recommending  it  to  them." 

Boston  Post. 

"  This  beautifully  printed  volume  is  an  important  contribution  to  the  history  of 
the  war  of  the  Revolution.  It  establishes  beyond  a  question  the  treason  of  one  of 
the  most  distinguished  generals  of  that  war,  who  was  second  in  command  to  Wash 
ington." — Providence  Journal. 

"  The  researches  of  Mr.  Moore  reflect  great  credit  on  his  industry  and  penetra 
tion  as  a  historical  student,  and  we  unite  with  those  better  capable  of  judging  than 
ourselves,  that  he  has  brought  to  light  important  facts,  which  tend  more  to  clear  up 
obscure  points  in  our  Revolutionary  history  than  any  thing  that  has  appeared  since  the 
events  alluded  to  took  place." — Providence  Journal. 

"  The  volume  abounds  with  curious  details,  and  will  be  read  with  great  interest 
by  the  student  of  American  history." — N.  T.  Tribune. 

No  student  of  American  history  can  afford  to  be  without  this  book." — R.  I. 
Schoolmaster. 

"  One  of  the  most  valuable  contributions  to  our  Revolutionary  history  that  has 
ever  been  published.  '  *  *  Mr.  Moore's  carefulness  and  completeness  of  re 
search  are  fine  qualities  of  the  historian,  happily  exhibited  in  this  volume."—  Chris 
tian  Intelligencer. 

"  Sound  judgment,  thorough  research,  just  appreciation  of  character,  an  acute 
perception  of  the  logical  connection  of  events  chronologically  disjoined,  and  a  ready 
command  of  clear,  precise,  and  appropriate  language,  have  enabled  Mr.  Moore  to 
make  a  volume,  which,  taken  in  all  its  bearings,  may  unhesitatingly  be  pronounced 
the  most  important  monograph  ever  contributed  to  the  history  of  the  War  of  Inde 
pendence." — Nciv  York  Times. 

"  Crammed  with  the  valuable  results  of  original  investigations.  Alany  of  the 
documents  never  before  published,  and  throwing  a  new  and  unexpected  light  on  a  very 
interesting  episode  of  the  Revolution." — Evening  Post. 

Also: 

HISTORICAL   NOTES   ON  THE   EMPLOYMENT 

of  Negroes   in  the   American  Army  of  the  Revolution. 
Pamphlet.      8vo.      24  pages.     Fifty  cents. 


[PROSPECTUS.] 
THE 

STATUTES    AT    LARGE    OF    NEW-YORK 

1664-1691. 


The  laivs  of  a  nation  form  the  most  instructive  portion  of  its  history" 


I  propose  to  publish  the  STATUTES  AT  LARGE  OF  NEW  YORK  from  1664  to  1691. 
The  first  English  Laws  were  established  in  the  Province  immediately  after  the  reduc 
tion  of  the  Dutch  in  New-Netherland,  by  the  authority  of  Letters  Patent  granted 
by  King  Charles  II.  to  his  brother,  James,  Duke  of  York,  March  I2th,  1664. 
These  laws,  since  known  as  "  the  Duke's  Laws,"  were  altered,  explained,  and 
amended  by  the  same  authority  during  the  succeeding  years  until  1683,  when  the 
first  Representative  Assembly  met  in  New- York.  Laws  were  enacted  by  this 
Assembly  in  that  and  the  following  year,  and  a  second  Assembly  met  and  enacted 
others  in  the  year  1685,  after  the  accession  of  James  II.  to  the  throne.  This,  how 
ever,  was  the  only  meeting  of  an  Assembly  in  New- York  during  his  reign — for  in 
1686  he  abolished  the  Assembly,  and  made  his  Governor  and  Council  the  legislature 
of  the  Province.  Several  acts  were  passed  by  this  body  in  the  years  1687  and  1688  j 
and  these,  with  the  acts  of  the  Assembly  summoned  by  Leisler  during  the  troubles 
which  attended  the  Revolution,  complete  the  Body  of  Laws  which  it  is  now  proposed 
to  pubiish. 

Of  all  these  statutes,  fragments  only  are  accessible  to  the  student  either  of  Law 
or  History.  It  is  well  known  that  no  printing-press  was  established  in  New- York 
until  after  the  era  of  the  English  Revolution  of  1688 ;  and  the  laws  were  published 
in  manuscript,  many  being  preserved  only  in  the  public  records  $  and  the  Acts  of 
the  first  Assemblies  were  so  neglected,  that  the  historian,  also  one  of  the  principal 
lawyers  of  the  time,  declared  more  than  a  century  ago,  that  they  were  "  for  the  most 
part  rotten,  defaced,  or  lost." 

In  the  first  volume  of  the  Collections  of  the  New- York  Historical  Society  there 
is  a  copy  of  the  East  Hampton  Book  of  Laws,  and  in  the  Appendix  to  the  Revised 
Laws  of  1813  are  imperfect  copies  of  three  of  the  Acts  of  the  First  Assembly,  while 
in  one  instance  (and  but  one,  I  believe),  another  Act  of  the  same  Assembly  is  recited 
in  an  enactment  of  a  subsequent  legislature.  The  printed  laws  of  New- York  begin 
with  the  year  1691,  and,  with  the  exceptions  just  mentioned,  the  whole  body  of  laws 
of  the  first  twenty-six  years  of  the  English  government  of  New- York  exists  only  in 
scattered,  obscure,  and  fast  perishing  manuscripts. 

Their  importance  to  the  lawyer  as  well  as  the  historian  is  obvious,  for  they  are 
the  basis  of  all  subsequent  legislation  in  respect  to  the  subjects  to  which  they  relate. 


(2) 

They  "  tend  to  show  the  progressive  state  of  our  laws,  with  the  various  changes  they 
have  undergone  from  the  commencement,  and  serve  to  throw  great  light  on  the 
historical  transactions  "  of  the  colonial  period.  Instances  have  not  been  wanting, 
and  may  yet  occur,  in  which,  «  though  they  do  not  govern,  they  may  be  found 
proper  to  guide." 

The  volume  will  comprise  the  Nicolls  Code  as  originally  promulgated  in  1665  ; 
the  Alterations,  Additions,  and  Amendments  of  1665  and  16665  the  "Duke's 
Laws,"  as  approved  and  established  in  i667~'68;  the  Orders  of  the  General  Court  of 
Assizes  and  the  Governor  and  Council,  from  1667  to  1683;  the  Acts  of  Assembly 
of  1683,  1684,  and  1685;  the  Acts  of  the  Governor  and  Council  from  1686  to 
1689;  and  the  Acts  of  the  Assembly  summoned  by  Leisler  in  1690. 

Various  illustrative  documents  will  be  given,  with  a  Historical  Introduction  and 
Notes,  among  which  will  be  found  biographical  notices  of  the  English  Governors  of 
New- York  from  1664  to  1691.  I  propose  to  add  fac-similes  of  various  acts  of  ap 
proval,  and  the  volume  will  be  completed  by  a  full  and  thorough  analytical  index. 

It  will  be  printed  in  the  best  manner,  in  large  octavo  form,  and  will  make  a 
volume  of  not  less  than  three  hundred  pages. 

PRICE,  FIVE  DOLLARS,  payable  on  delivery. 

GEORGE   H.    MOORE, 

Librarian  of  the  New-  York  Historical  Society. 
NEW-YORK,  October,  1862. 


If  sufficient  encouragement  is  given  to  warrant  the  undertaking,  the  work 
will  be  continued  through  the  remainder  of  the  Colonial  period — 1691-1775.  Of 
nearly  two  thousand  statutes  enacted  during  these  years  by  thirty-two  different 
Assemblies,  not  one-third  have  been  printed  in  the  various  collected  and  revised 
editions,  and  all  are  long  since  out  of  print. 


RETURN 


CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 

198  Main  Stacks 


LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS. 

Renewls  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date. 

Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling  642-3405. 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


SH   0  o  1998 


U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


